'  11, 17,9..:-^ 


E)^po  -i-^ible 


■  r 


EZRA,    NEHEMIAH, 


AND 


ESTHER 


BY 

WALTER   F.^DENEY,  'M.A. 

PROFESSOR  OF  NKW  TESTAMENT  EXEGESIS  AND  CHURCH  HISTORY, 
NEW  COLLEGE,   LONDON 


NEW  YORK 

A.    C.    ARMSTRONG    AND    SON 

51    EAST    TENTH    STREET 

1893 


4'' 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER   I. 

PAGE 

INTRODUCTORY  :     EZRA  AND   NEHEMIAH  ...  I 


CHAPTER    n. 
CYRUS 12 

CHAPTER  III. 

THE   ROYAL   EDICT 24 

CHAPTER  IV. 
THE   SECOND   EXODUS 36 

CHAPTER    V. 
THE  NEW  TEMPLE 48 

CHAPTER   VI. 
THE   LIMITS   OF   COMPREHENSION 60 

CHAPTER  VH. 
THE   MISSION   OF   PROPHECY      ...  .  .        'JZ 


vi  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

PAGE 

NEW  DIFFICULTIES   MET  IN  A  NEW  SPIRIT    ...        83 


CHAPTER   IX. 
THE  DEDICATION  OF  THE  TEMPLE 95 

CHAPTER  X. 
EZRA  THE  SCRIBE IO7 

CHAPTER   XI. 
EZRA'S  EXPEDITION II 9 

CHAPTER  XII. 
FOREIGN   MARRIAGES 131 

CHAPTER  XIII. 
THE  HOME  SACRIFICED  TO  THE   CHURCH       .  .  .      I42 

CHAPTER  XIV. 
THE  COST  OF  AN  IDEALIST'S  SUCCESS    .  .  .  -153 

CHAPTER  XV. 
NEHEMIAH   THE  PATRIOT 1 63 

CHAPTER  XVI. 
NEHEMIAH'S  PRAYER 1 74 

CHAPTER    XVII. 
THE  PRAYER  ANSWERED 1 86 


CONTENTS,  vii 

CHAPTER  XVIII. 

PAGB 

THE   MIDNIGHT   RIDE I98 

CHAPTER  XIX. 
BUILDING  THE  WALLS 210 

CHAPTER   XX. 

"  MARK  YE   WELL  HER   BULWARKS "       .  .  .  .223 

CHAPTER   XXI. 
ON  GUARD 235 

CHAPTER   XXII. 
USURY 247 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 
WISE  AS  SERPENTS 259 

CHAPTER   XXIV. 
THE   LAW      . 271 

CHAPTER   XXV. 
THE  JOY    OF  THE   LORD 284 

CHAPTER   XXVI. 
THE   RELIGION  OF  HISTORY 295 

CHAPTER  XXVIl. 
THE   COVENANT 307 


viii  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER   XXVIII. 

PAGE 

THE   HOLY  CITY.  317 


CHAPTER   XXIX. 
BEGINNINGS 328 

CHAPTER  XXX. 
THE   RIGOUR  OF  THE   REFORMER 339 

CHAPTER  XXXI. 
THE   BOOK  OF  ESTHER:    INTRODUCTORY         .  .  -351 

CHAPTER   XXXII. 
AHASUERUS  AND  VASHTI 3^1 

CHAPTER  XXXIII. 
HAMAN 2>T^ 

CHAPTER  XXXIV. 
QUEEN  ESTHER 2^'^2 

CHAPTER  XXXV. 
MORDECAI 392 


CHAPTER   I. 

INTRODUCTORY:  EZRA   AND  NEHEMIAH. 

THOUGH  in  close  contact  with  the  most  perplexing 
problems  of  Old  Testament  literature,  the  main 
history  recorded  in  the  books  of  'Ezra'  and  'Nehemiah' 
is  fixed  securely  above  the  reach  of  adverse  criticism. 
Here  the  most  cautious  reader  may  take  his  stand 
with  the  utmost  confidence,  knowing  that  his  feet  rest 
on  a  solid  rock.  The  curiously  inartistic  process 
adopted  by  the  writer  is  in  itself  some  guarantee  of 
authenticity.  Ambitious  authors  who  set  out  with  the 
design  of  creating  literature — and  perhaps  building 
up  a  reputation  for  themselves  by  the  way — may  be 
very  conscientious  in  their  search  for  truth ;  but  we 
cannot  help  suspecting  that  the  method  of  melting  down 
their  materials  and  recasting  them  in  the  mould  of  their 
own  style  which  they  usually  adopt  must  gravely 
endanger  their  accuracy.  Nothing  of  the  kind  is 
attempted  in  this  narrative.  In  considerable  portions 
of  it  the  primitive  records  are  simply  copied  word  for 
word,  without  the  least  pretence  at  original  writing  on 
the  part  of  the  historian.  Elsewhere  he  has  evidently 
kept  as  near  as  possible  to  the  form  of  his  materials, 
even  when  the  plan  of  his  work  has  necessitated  some 
condensation  or  readjustment.  The  crudity  of  this 
procedure  must  be  annoying  to  literary  epicures  who 

I 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


prefer  flavour  to  substance,  but  it  should  be  an  occasion 
of  thankfulness  on  the  part  of  those  of  us  who  wish  to 
trace  the  revelation  of  God  in  the  life  of  Israel,  because 
it  shows  that  we  are  brought  as  nearly  as  possible  face 
to  face  with  the  facts  in  which  that  revelation  was 
clothed. 

In  the  first  place,  we  have  some  of  the  very  writings 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  the  leading  actors  in  the  great 
drama  of  real  life  that  is  here  set  forth.  We  cannot 
doubt  the  genuineness  of  these  writings.  They  are 
each  of  them  composed  in  the  first  person  singular,  and 
they  may  be  sharply  distinguished  from  the  remainder 
of  the  narrative,  inasmuch  as  that  is  in  the  third  person 
— not  to  mention  other  and  finer  marks  of  difference. 
Of  course  this  implies  that  the  whole  of  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah  should  not  be  ascribed  to  the  two  men  whose 
names  the  books  bear  in  our  English  Bibles.  The 
books  themselves  do  not  make  any  claim  to  be  written 
throughout  by  these  great  men.  On  the  contrary,  they 
clearly  hint  the  opposite,  by  the  transition  to  the  third 
person  in  those  sections  which  are  not  extracted 
verbatim  from  one  or  other  of  the  two  authorities. 

It  is  most  probable  that  the  Scripture  books  now 
known  as  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  were  compiled  by  one 
and  the  same  person,  that,  in  fact,  they  originally 
constituted  a  single  work.  This  view  was  held  by  the 
scribes  who  arranged  the  Hebrew  Canon,  for  there 
they  appear  as  one  book.  In  the  Talmud  they  are 
treated  as  one.  So  they  are  among  the  early  Christian 
writers.  As  late  as  the  fifth  century  of  our  era  Jerome 
gives  the  name  of  "  Esdras "  to  both,  describing 
'^Nehemiah  "  as  "The  Second  Book  of  Esdras." 

Further,  there  seem  to  be  good  reasons  for  believing 
that  the  compiler  of  our  Ezra-Nehemiah  was  no  other 


INTRODUCTORY :  EZRA   AND  NEHEMIAH.  3 

than  the  author  of  Chronicles.  The  repetition  of  the 
conckiding  passage  of  2  Chronicles  as  the  introduction 
to  Ezra  is  an  indication  that  the  latter  was  intended 
to  be  a  continuation  of  the  Chronicler's  version  of  the 
History  of  Israel.  When  we  compare  the  two  works 
together,  we  come  across  many  indications  of  their 
agreement  in  spirit  and  style.  In  both  we  discover  a 
disposition  to  hurry  over  secular  affairs  in  order  to 
dilate  on  the  religious  aspects  of  history.  In  both 
we  meet  with  the  same  exalted  estimation  of  The  Law, 
the  same  unwearied  interest  in  the  details  of  temple 
ritual  and  especially  in  the  musical  arrangements  of 
the  Levites,  and  the  same  singular  fascination  for  long 
lists  of  names,  which  are  inserted  wherever  an  oppor- 
tunity for  letting  them  in  can  be  found. 

Now,  there  are  several  tjiings  in  our  narrative  that 
tend  to  show  that  the  Chronicler  belongs  to  a  cgni- 
paratively  late  period.     Thus  in  Nehemiah  xii.  22  he   T 
mentions  the  succession  of  priests  down  ''to  the  reign 
of  Darius  the  Persian."     The  position  of  this  phrase 
in  connection  with  the  previous  lists  of  names  makes 
it  clear   that  the   sovereign  here  referred  to  must  be 
Darius  III.,  surnamed  Codommanus,  the  last  king  of 
Persia,  who  reigned  from  B.C.  336  to  B.C.  332.     Then     rr, 
the  title  ''  the  Persian "  suggests   the  conclusion  that 
the  dynasty  of  Persia  had  passed  away ;  so  does  the 
phrase  "  king  of  Persia,"  which  we  meet  with  in  the 
Chronicler's  portion  of  the  narrative.     The  simple  ex- 
pression ''the  king,"  without  any  descriptive  addition, 
would   be    sufficient  on  the   lips    of  a    contemporary. 
Accordingly  we  find  that  it  is  used  in  the  first-person 
sections  of  Ezra-Nehemiah,  and  in  those  royal  edicts 
that  are  cited  in  full.     Again,  Nehemiah  xii.  1 1  and  22  J^U^ 
give  us   the  name   of  Jaddua  in   the  series  of  high- 


EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


priests.  But  Jaddua  lived  as  late  as  the  time  of  Alex- 
ander; his  date  must  be  about  b.c.  331.*  This  lands 
us  in  the  Grecian  period.  Lastly,  the  references  to 
"  the  days  of  Nehemiah  "  f  clearly  point  to  a  writer  in 
some  subsequent  age.  Though  it  is  justly  urged  that 
it  was  quite  in  accordance  with  custom  for  later  scribes 
to  work  over  an  old  book,  inserting  a  phrase  here  and 
there  to  bring  it  up  to  date,  the  indications  of  the  later 
date  are  too  closely  interwoven  with  the  main  structure 
of  the  composition  to  admit  this  hypothesis  here. 

Nevertheless,  though  we  seem  to  be  shut  up  to  the 
view  that  the  Grecian  era  had  been  reached  before  our 
book  was  put  together,  this  is  really  only  a  matter  of 
literary  interest,  seeing  that  it  is  agreed  on  all  sides  that 
the  history  is  authentic,  and  that  the  constituent  parts 
of  it  are  contemporary  with  the  events  they  record. 
The  function  of  the  compiler  of  such  a  book  as  this  is 
not  much  more  than  that  of  an  editor.  It  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  the  date  of  the  final  editor  is  as  late  as  the 
Macedonian  Empire.  The  only  question  is  whether  this 
man  was  the  sole  editor  and  compiler  of  the  narrative. 
We  may  let  that  point  of  purely  literary  criticism  be 
settled  in  favour  of  the  later  date  for  the  original  com- 
pilation, and  yet  rest  satisfied  that  we  have  all  we  v/ant 
— a  thoroughly  genuine  history  in  which  to  study  the 
ways  of  God  with  man  during  the  days  of  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah. 

This  narrative  is  occupied  with  the  Persian  period  of 
the  History  of  Israel.  It  shows  us  points  of  contact 
between  the  Jews  and  a  great  Oriental  Empire ;  but, 
unlike  the  history  in  the  dismal  Babylonian  age,  the 


*  Josephus,  Ant.,  XL  viii. 
•j-  Neh.  xii.  26  and  47. 


INTRODUCTORY :   EZRA   AND  NEHEMIAH.  5 

course  of  events  now  moves  forward  among  scenes  of 
hopeful  progress.  The  new  dominion  is  of  an  Aryan 
stock  —  intelligent,  appreciative,  generous.  Like  the 
Christians  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  the  Jews  now 
find  the  supreme  government  friendly  to  them,  even 
ready  to  protect  them  from  the  assaults  of  their  hostile 
neighbours.  It  is  in  this  political  relationship,  and 
scarcely,  if  at  all,  by  means  of  the  intercommunication 
of  ideas  affecting  religion,  that  the  Persians  take  an 
important  place  in  the  story  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 
We  shall  see  much  of  their  official  action  ;  we  can  but 
grope  about  vaguely  in  search  of  the  few  hints  of  their 
influence  on  the  theology  of  Israel  that  may  be  looked 
for  on  the  pages  of  the  sacred  narrative.  Still  a  re- 
markable characteristic  of  the  leading  religious  move- 
ment of  this  time  is  the  Oriental  and  foreign  locality 
of  its  source.  It  springs  up  in  the  breasts  of  Jews 
who  are  most  stern  in  their  racial  exclusiveness,  most 
relentless  in  their  scornful  rejection  of  any  Gentile 
alliance.  But  this  is  on  a  foreign  soil.  It  comes  from 
Babylon,  not  Jerusalem.  Again  and  again  fresh  im- 
pulses and  new  resources  are  brought  up  to  the  sacred 
city,  and  always  from  the  far-off  colony  in  the  land 
of  exile.  Here  the  money  for  the  cost  of  the  rebuild- 
ing of  the  temple  was  collected ;  here  The  Law  was 
studied  and  edited;  here  means  were  found  for  restoring 
the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem.  Not  only  did  the  first 
company  of  pilgrims  go  up  from  Babylon  to  begin  a 
new  life  among  the  tombs  of  their  fathers ;  but  one 
after  another  fresh  bands  of  emigrants,  borne  on  new 
waves  of  enthusiasm,  swept  up  from  the  apparently 
inexhaustible  centres  of  Judaism  in  the  East  to  rally 
the  flagging  energies  of  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem.  For 
a  long  while  this  city  was  only  maintained  with  the 


EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


greatest  difficulty  as  a  sort  of  outpost  from  Babylon  : 
it  was  little  better  than  a  pilgrim's  camp ;  often  it  was 
in  danger  of  destruction  from  the  uncongenial  character 
of  its  surroundings.  Therefore  it  is  Babylonian  Judaism 
that  here  claims  our  attention.  The  mission  of  this 
great  religious  movement  is  to  found  and  cultivate  an 
offshoot  of  itself  in  the  old  country.  Its  beginning 
is  at  Babylon ;  its  end  is  to  shape  the  destinies  of 
Jerusalem. 

Three  successive  embassies  from  the  living  heart  of 
Judaism  in  Babylon  go  up  to  Jerusalem,  each  with  its 
own  distinctive  function  in  the  promotion  of  the  pur- 
poses of  the  mission.  The  first  is  led  by  Zerubbabel 
and  Jeshua  in  the  year  B.C.  53/.*  The  second  is  con- 
ducted by  Ezra  eighty  years  later.  The  third  follows 
shortly  after  this  with  Nehemiah  as  its  central  figure. 
Each  of  the  two  first-named  expeditions  is  a  great 
popular  migration  of  men,  women,  and  children  re- 
turning home  from  exile ;  Nehemiah's  journey  is  more 
personal — the  travelling  of  an  officer  of  state  with  his 
escort.  The  principal  events  of  the  history  spring  out 
of  these  three  expeditions.  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua 
are  commissioned  to  restore  the  sacrifices  and  rebuild 
the  temple  at  Jerusalem.  Ezra  sets  forth  with  the 
visible  object  of  further  ministering  to  the  resources 
of  the  sacred  shrine;  but  the  real  end  that  he  is  in- 
wardly aiming  at  is  the  introduction  of  The  Law  to 
the  people  of  Jerusalem.  Nehemiah's  main  purpose 
is  to  rebuild  the  city  walls,  and  so  restore  the  civic 
character  of  Jerusalem  and  enable  her  to  maintain  her 


*  Allowing  some  months  for  the  preparation  of  the  expedition — 
and  this  we  must  do — we  may  safely  say  that  it  started  in  the  year 
after  the  decree  of  Cyrus,  which  was  issued  in  B.C.  538. 


INTRODUCTORY:  EZRA   AND  NEHEMIAH. 


independence  in  spite  of  the  opposition  of  neighbouring 
foes.  Ji2,aUjJbLni£,i;ases  .a  strong  rehgious  motive  lies^ 
_^^^i}£^Xi?5i-.Qi^  the  public  action^  To  Ezra  the  priest 
and  scribe  reHgion  was  everything.  He  might  almost 
have  taken  as  his  motto,  ''  Perish  the  State,  if  the 
Church  may  be  saved."  He  desired  to  absorb  the 
State  into  the  Church  :  he  would  permit  the  former  to 
exist,  indeed,  as  the  visible  vehicle  of  the  religious  life 
of  the  community ;  but  to  sacrifice  the  religious  ideal 
in  deference  to  political  exigencies  was  a  policy  against 
which  he  set  his  face  like  flint  when  it  was  advocated 
by  a  latitudinarian  party  among  the  priests.  The  con- 
flict which  was  brought  about  by  this  clash  of  opposing 
principles  was  the  great  battle  of  his  life.  Nehemiah 
was  a  statesman,  a  practical  man,  a  courtier  who  knew 
the  world.  Outwardly  his  aims  and  methods  were  very 
different  from  those  of  the  unpractical  scholar.  Yet  the 
two  men  thoroughly  understood  one  another.  Nehemiah 
caught  the  spirit  of  Ezra's  ideas ;  and  Ezra,  whose  work 
came  to  a  standstill  while  he  was  left  to  his  own  re- 
sources, was  afterwards  able  to  carry  through  his  great 
religious  reformation  on  the  basis  of  the  younger  man's 
military  and  political  renovation  of  Jerusalem. 

In  all  this  the  central  figure  is  Ezra.  We  are 
able  to  see  the  most  marked  results  in  the  improved 
condition  of  the  city  after  his  capable  and  vigorous 
colleague  has  taken  up  the  reins  of  government.  But 
though  the  hand  is  then  the  hand  of  Nehemiah,  the 
voice  is  still  the  voice  of  Ezra.  Later  times  have 
exalted  the  figure  of  the  famous  scribe  into  gigantic 
proportions.  Even  as  he  appears  on  the  page  of  history 
he  is  sufficiently  great  to  stand  out  as  the  maker  of  his 
age. 

For  the  Jews  in  all  ages,  and  for  the  world  at  large, 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


the  great  event  of  this  period  is  the  adoption  of  The 
Law  by  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem.  Recent  investiga- 
tions and  discussions  have  directed  renewed  attention  to 
the  pubHcation  of  The  Law  by  Ezra,  and  the  acceptance 
of  it  on  the  part  of  Israel.  It  will  be  especially  im- 
portant, therefore,  for  us  to  study  these  things  in  the 
calm  and  ingenuous  record  of  the  ancient  historian, 
where  they  are  treated  without  the  slightest  anticipa- 
tion of  modern  controversies.  We  shall  have  to  see 
what  hints  this  record  affords  concerning  the  history  of 
The  Law  in  the  days  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

One  broad  fact  will  grow  upon  us  with  increasing 
clearness  as  we  proceed.  Evidently  we  have  here 
come  to  the  watershed  of  Hebrew  History.  Up  to  this 
point  all  the  better  teachers  of  Israel  had  been  toiling 
painfully  in  their  almost  hopeless  efforts  to  induce  the 
Jews  to  accept  the  unique  faith  of  Jehovah,  with  its 
lofty  claims  and  its  rigorous  restraints.  That  faith 
itself  however  had  appeared  in  three  forms, — as  a 
popular  cult,  often  degraded  to  the  level  of  the  local 
religion  of  heathen  neighbours  ;  as  a  priestly  tradition, 
exact  and  minute  in  its  performances,  but  the  secret  of 
a  caste;  and  as  a  subject  of  prophetic  instruction, 
instinct  with  moral  principles  of  righteousness  and 
spiritual  conceptions  of  God,  but  too  large  and  free  to 
be  reached  by  a  people  of  narrow  views  and  low  attain- 
ments. With  the  publication  of  The  Law  by  Ezra  the 
threefold  condition  ceased,  and  henceforth  there  was 
but  one  type  of  religion  for  the  Jews. 

The  question  when  The  Law  was  moulded  into  its 
present  shape  introduces  a  delicate  point  of  criticism. 
But  the  consideration  of  its  popular  reception  is  more 
within  the  reach  of  observation.  In  the  solemn  sealing 
of  the  covenant  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem — laity  as  well 


INTRODUCTORY:  EZRA   AND  NEHEMIAH.  9 

as  priests — men,  women,  and  children — all  deliberately 
pledged  themselves  to  worship  Jehovah  according  to 
The  Law.  There  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  they  had 
ever  done  so  before.  The  narrative  bears  every  indi- 
cation of  novelty.  The  Law  is  received  with  curiosity  ; 
it  is  only  understood  after  being  carefully  explained  by 
experts  ;  when  its  meaning  is  taken  in,  the  effect  is  a 
shock  of  amazement  bordering  on  despair.  Clearly  this 
is  no  collection  of  trite  precepts  known  and  practised 
by  the  people  from  antiquity. 

It  must  be  remembered,  on  the  other  hand,  that  an 
analogous  effect  was  produced  by  the  spread  of  the 
Scriptures  at  the  Reformation.  It  does  not  fall  within 
the  scope  of  our  present  task  to  pursue  the  inquiry 
whether,  like  the  Bible  in  Christendom,  the  entire  law 
had  been  in  existence  in  an  earlier  age,  though  then 
neglected  and  forgotten.  Yet  even  our  limited  period 
contains  evidence  that  The  Law  had  its  roots  in  the 
past.  The  venerated  name  of  Moses  is  repeatedly 
appealed  to  when  The  Law  is  to  be  enforced.  Ezra 
never  appears  as  a  Solon  legislating  for  his  people. 
Still  neither  is  he  a  Justinian  codifying  a  system  of 
legislation  already  recognised  and  adopted.  He 
stands  between  the  two,  as  the  introducer  of  a  law 
hitherto  unpractised  and  even  unknown.  These  facts 
will  come  before  us  more  in  detail  as  we  proceed. 

The  period  now  brought  before  our  notice  is  to  some 
extent  one  of  national  revival ;  but  it  is  much  more 
important  as  an  age  of  religious  construction.  The  Jews 
now  constitute  themselves  into  a  Church  ;  the  chief 
concern  of  their  leaders  is  to  develop  their  religious 
Hfe  and  character.  The  charm  of  these  times  is  to  be 
found  in  the  great  spiritual  awakening  that  inspires  and 
shapes  their  history.     Here  we  approach  very  near  to 


io  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER, 

the  Holy  Presence  of  the  Spirit  of  God  in  His  glorious 
activity  as  the  Lord  and  Giver  of  Life.  This  epoch  v^as 
to  Israel  what  Pentecost  became  to  the  Christians. 
Pentecost ! — We  have  only  to  face  the  comparison  to  see 
how  far  the  later  covenant  exceeded  the  earlier  covenant 
in  glor3\  To  us  Christians  there  is  a  hardness,  a 
narrowness,  a  painful  externalism  in  the  whole  of  this 
religious  movement.  We  cannot  say  that  it  lacks  soul ; 
but  we  feel  that  it  has  not  the  liberty  of  the  highest 
spiritual  vitality.  It  is  cramped  in  the  fetters  of  legal 
ordinances.  We  shall  come  across  evidences  of  the  ex- 
istence of  a  Hberal  party  that  shrank  from  the  rigour  of 
The  Law.  But  this  party  gave  no  signs  of  religious  life ; 
the  freedom  it  claimed  was  not  the  glorious  liberty  of 
the  sons  of  God.  There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that 
the  more  devout  people  anticipated  the  standpoint  of 
St.  Paul  and  saw  any  imperfection  in  their  law.  To 
them  it  presented  a  lofty  scheme  of  life,  worthy  of 
the  highest  aspiration.  And  there  is  much  in  their 
spirit  that  commands  our  admiration  and  even  our 
emulation.  The  most  obnoxious  feature  of  their  zeal 
is  its  pitiless  exclusiveness.  But  without  this  quality 
Judaism  would  have  been  lost  in  the  cross  currents  of 
life  among  the  mixed  populations  of  Palestine. 

The  policy  of  exclusiveness  saved  Judaism.  At 
heart  this  is  just  an  application — though  a  very  harsh 
and  formal  application — of  the  principle  of  separation 
from  the  world  which  Christ  and  His  Apostles  enjoined 
on  the  Church,  and  the  neglect  of  which  has  sometimes 
nearly  resulted  in  the  disappearance  of  any  distinctive 
Christian  truth  and  life,  like  the  disappearance  of  a 
river  that  breaking  through  its  banks  spreads  itself  out 
in  lagoons  and  morasses,  and  ends  by  being  swallowed 
up  in  the  sands  of  the  desert. 


INTRODUCTORY :  EZRA   AND  NEHEMIAIL 


The  exterior  aspect  of  the  stern,  strict  Judaism  of 
these  days  is  by  no  means  attractive.  But  the  interior 
Hfe  of  it  is  simply  superb.  It  recognises  the  absolute 
supremacy  of  God,  In  the  will  of  God  it  acknowledges 
the  one  unquestionable  authority  before  which  all  who 
accept  His  covenant  must  bow  ;  in  the  revealed  truth 
of  God  it  perceives  an  inflexible  rule  for  the  conduct  of 
His  people.  To  be  pledged  to  allegiance  to  the  will  and 
law  of  God  is  to  be  truly  consecrated  to  God.  That  is 
the  condition  voluntarily  entered  into  by  the  citizens  of 
Jerusalem  in  this  epoch  of  religious  awakening.  A  few 
centuries  later  their  example  was  followed  by  the 
primitive  Christians,  who,  according  to  the  testimony 
of  the  two  Bithynian  handmaidens  tortured  by  Pliny, 
solemnly  pledged  themselves  to  lives  of  purity  and 
righteousness ;  again,  it  was  imitated,  though  in 
strangely  perverted  guise,  by  anchorites  and  monks, 
by  the  great  founders  of  monastic  orders  and  their 
loyal  disciples,  and  by  mediaeval  reformers  of  Church 
discipline  such  as  St.  Bernard  ;  still  later  it  was  followed 
more  closely  by  the  Protestant  inhabitants  of  Swiss 
cities  at  the  Reformation,  by  the  early  Independents  at 
home  and  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  in  New  England,  by  the 
Covenanters  in  Scotland,  by  the  first  Methodists.  It  is 
the  model  of  Church  order,  and  the  ideal  of  the  religious 
organisation  of  civic  life.  But  it  awaits  the  adequate 
fulfilment  of  its  promise  in  the  establishment  of  the 
Heavenly  City,  the  New  Jerusalem. 


^ 


^ 


\"^ 


CHAPTER   II. 

CYRUS. 
Ezra  i.  i. 

THE  remarkable  words  with  which  the  Second 
Book  of  Chronicles  closes,  and  which  are  re- 
peated in  the  opening  verses  of  the  Book  of  Ezra,  afford 
the  most  striking  instance  on  record  of  that  peculiar 
connection  between  the  destinies  of  the  little  Hebrew 
nation  and  the  movements  of  great  World  Empires 
which  frequently  emerges  in  history.  We  cannot 
altogether  set  it  down  to  the  vanity  of  their  writers,  or 
to  the  lack  of  perspective  accompanying  a  contracted, 
provincial  education,  that  the  Jews  are  represented  in 
the  Old  Testament  as  playing  a  more  prominent  part  on 
the  world's  stage  than  one  to  which  the  size  of  their 
territory — little  bigger  than  Wales — or  their  military 
prowess  would  entitle  them.  The  fact  is  indisputable. 
No  doubt  it  is  to  be  attributed  in  part  to  the  geo- 
graphical position  of  Palestine  on  the  highway  of  the 
march  of  armies  to  and  fro  between  Asia  and  Africa ; 
but  it  must  spring  also  in  some  measure  from  the 
unique  qualities  of  the  strange  people  who  have  given 
their  religion  to  the  most  civilised  societies  of  man- 
kind. 

In  the  case  before  us  the  greatest  man  of  his  age, 
one  of  the  half-dozen  Founders  of  Empires,  who  con- 


Ezrai.  1.]  CYRUS.  13 


stitute  a  lofty  aristocracy  even  among  sovereigns,  is 
manifestly  concerning  himself  very  specially  with  the 
restoration  of  one  of  the  smallest  of  the  many  subject 
races  that  fell  into  his  hands  when  he  seized  the 
garnered  spoils  of  previous  conquerors.  Whatever  we 
may  think  of  the  precise  words  of  his  decree  as  this  is 
now  reported  to  us  by  a  Hebrew  scribe,  it  is  unques- 
tionable that  he  issued  some  such  orders  as  are  con- 
tained in  it.  Cyrus,  as  it  now  appears,  was  originally 
king  of  Elam,  the  modern  Khuzistan,  not  of  Persia, 
although  the  royal  family  from  which  he  sprang  was 
of  Persian  extraction.  After  making  himself  master  of 
Persia  and  building  up  an  empire  in  Asia  Minor  and 
the  north,  he  swept  dow^n  on  to  the  plains  of  Chaldaea 
and  captured  Bab3don  in  the  year  B.C.  538.  To  the 
Jews  this  would  be  the  first  year  of  his  reign,  because 
it  was  the  first  year  of  his  rule  over  them,  just  as  the 
year  a.d.  1603  is  reckoned  by  Enghshmen  as  the  first 
year  of  James  I.,  because  the  king  of  Scotland  then 
inherited  the  English  throne.  In  this  year  the  new 
sovereign,  of  his  own  initiative,  released  the  Hebrew 
exiles,  and  even  assisted  them  to  return  to  Jerusalem 
and  rebuild  their  ruined  temple.  Such  an  astounding 
act  of  generosity  was  contrary  to  the  precedent  of 
other  conquerors,  who  accepted  as  a  matter  of  course 
the  arrangement  of  subject  races  left  by  their  pre- 
decessors ;  and  we  are  naturally  curious  to  discover 
the  motives  that  prompted  it. 

Like  our  mythical  King  Arthur,  the  Cyrus  of  legend 
is  credited  with  a  singularly  attractive  disposition. 
Herodotus  says  the  Persians  regarded  him  as  their 
"father"  and  their  "shepherd."  In  Xenophon's  ro- 
mance he  appears  as  a  very  kindly  character.  Cicero 
calls   him   the  most  just,  wise,  and   amiable  of  rulers. 


14  .EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

Although  it  cannot  be  dignified  with  the  .name  of 
history,  this  universally  accepted  tradition  seems  to 
point  to  some  foundation  in  fact.  It  is  entirely  in 
accord  with  the  Jewish  picture  of  the  Great  King. 
There  is  some  reason  for  believing  that  the  privilege 
Cyrus  offered  to  the  Jews  was  one  in  which  other 
nations  shared.  On  a  small,  broken,  clay  cylinder, 
some  four  inches  in  diameter,  discovered  quite  recently 
and  now  deposited  in  the  British  Museum,  Cyrus  is 
represented  as  saying,  "  I  assembled  all  those  nations, 
and  I  caused  them  to  go  back  to  their  countries." 
Thus  the  return  of  the  Jews  may  be  regarded  as  a  part 
of  a  general  centrifugal  movement  in  the  new  Empire. 

Nevertheless,  the  peculiar  favour  indicated  by  the 
decree  issued  to  the  Jews  suggests  something  special  in 
their  case,  and  this  must  be  accounted  for  before  the 
action  of  Cyrus  can  be  well  understood. 

Little  or  no  weight  can  be  attached  to  the  statement 
of  Josephus,  who  inserts  in  the  very  language  of  the 
decree  a  reference  to  the  foreteUing  of  the  name  of 
Cyrus  by  "  the  prophets,"  as  a  prime  motive  for  issuing 
it,  and  adds  that  this  was  known  to  Cyrus  by  his 
reading  the  Book  of  Isaiah.*  Always  more  or  less 
untrustworthy  whenever  he  touches  the  relations 
between  his  people  and  foreigners,  the  Jewish  his- 
torian is  even  exceptionally  unsatisfactory  in  his  treat- 
ment of  the  Persian  Period.  It  may  be,  as  Ewald 
asserts,  that  Josephus  is  here  following  some  Hellen- 
istic writer;  but  we  know  nothing  of  his  authority. 
There  is  no  reference  to  this  in  our  one  authority,  the 
Book  of  Ezra  ;  and  if  it  had  been  true  there  would  have 
been  every  reason  to  publish  it.  Some  Jews  at  court 
may  have   shown  Cyrus  the   prophecies    in  question ; 

*  Ant.f  XI.  i.  I,  2. 


Ezra.  i.  I.]  CYRUS.  15 

indeed  it  is  most  probable  that  men  who  wished  to  please 
him  would  have  done  so.  Plato  in  the  "  Laws  "  repre- 
sents Cyrus  as  honouring  those  who  knew  how  to  give 
good  advice.  But  it  is  scarcely  reasonable  to  suppose, 
without  a  particle  of  evidence,  that  a  great  monarch 
flushed  with  victory  would  set  himself  to  carry  out  a 
prediction  purporting  to  emanate  from  the  Deity  of  one 
of  the  conquered  peoples,  when  that  prediction  was 
distinctly  in  their  interest,  unless  he  was  first  actuated 
by  some  other   considerations. 

Until  a  few  years  ago  it  was  commonly  supposed  that 
Cyrus  was  a  Zoroastrian,  who  was  disgusted  at  the 
cruel  and  lustful  idolatry  of  the  Babylonians,  and  that 
when  he  discovered  a  monotheistic  people  oppressed 
by  vicious  heathen  polytheists,  he  claimed  religious 
brotherhood  with  them,  and  so  came  to  show  them 
singular  favour.  Unfortunately  for  his  fame,  this 
fascinating  theory  has  been  recently  shattered  by  the 
discovery  of  the  little  cylinder  already  referred  to. 
Here  Cyrus  is  represented  as  saying  that  "  the  gods " 
have  deserted  Nabonidas — the  last  king  of  Babylon — ■ 
because  he  has  neglected  their  service ;  and  that 
Merodach,  the  national  divinity  of  Babylon,  has  trans- 
ferred his  favour  to  Cyrus  ;  who  now  honours  him  with 
many  praises.  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  refute 
the  evidence  of  this  ancient  record  by  attributing  the 
cylinder  to  some  priest  of  Bel,  who,  it  is  said,  may 
have  drawn  up  the  inscription  without  the  knowledge 
of  the  king,  and  even  in  direct  opposition  to  his  religious 
views.  A  most  improbable  hypothesis  !  especially  as 
we  have  absolutely  no  grounds  for  the  opinion  that 
Cyrus  was  a  Zoroastrian.  The  Avesta,  the  sacred 
collection  of  hymns  which  forms  the  basis  of  the  Parsee 
scriptures,  came  from  the  far  East,  close  to  India,  and  it 


i6  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


was  written  in  a  language  almost  identical  with  Sanscrit 
and  quite  different  from  the  Old  Persian  of  Western 
Persia.  We  have  no  ground  for  supposing  that  as 
yet  it  had  been  adopted  in  the  remote  south-western 
region  of  Elam,  where  Cyrus  was  brought  up.  That 
monarch,  it  would  seem,  was  a  liberal-minded  syncretist, 
as  ready  to  make  himself  at  home  with  the  gods  of  the 
peoples  he  conquered  as  with  their  territories.  Such  a 
man  would  be  astute  enough  to  represent  the  indigenous 
divinities  as  diverting  their  favour  from  the  fallen  and 
therefore  discredited  kings  he  had  overthrown,  and 
transferring  it  to  the  new  victor.  We  must  therefore 
descend  from  the  highlands  of  theology  in  our  search 
for  an  explanation  of  the  conduct  of  Cyrus.  Can  we 
find  this  in  som.e  department  of  state  policy  ? 

We  learn  from  the  latter  portion  of  our  Book  of 
Isaiah  that  the  Jewish  captives  suffered  persecution 
under  Nabonidas.  It  is  not  difficult  to  guess  the  cause 
of  the  embitterment  of  this  king  against  them  after  they 
had  been  allowed  to  live  in  peace  and  prosperity  under 
his  predecessors.  Evidently  the  policy  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, which  may  have  succeeded  with  some  other 
races,  had  broken  down  in  its  application  to  a  people 
with  such  tough  national  vitality  as  that  of  the  Jews. 
It  was  found  to  be  impossible  to  eradicate  their 
patriotism — or  rather  the  patriotism  of  the  faithful 
nucleus  of  the  nation,  impossible  to  make  Jerusalem 
forgotten  by  the  waters  of  Babylon.  This  ancient 
^*  Semitic  question  '*'  was  the  very  reverse  of  that  which 
now  vexes  Eastern  Europe,  because  in  the  case  of  the 
Jews  at  Babylon  the  troublesome  aliens  were  only 
desirous  of  Hberty  to  depart ;  but  it  sprang  from  the  same 
essential  cause — the  separateness  of  the  Hebrew  race. 

Now  things  often  present  themselves  in  a  true  light 


Ezra  i.  I.]  CYRUS.  17 

to  a  new-comer  who  approaches  them  with  a  certain 
mental  detachment,  although  they  may  have  been 
grievously  misapprehended  by  those  people  among 
whom  they  have  slowly  shaped  themselves.  Cyrus 
was  a  man  of  real  genius  ;  and  immediately  he  came 
upon  the  scene  he  must  have  perceived  the  mistake 
of  retaining  a  restless,  disaffected  population,  like  a 
foreign  body  rankling  in  the  very  heart  of  his  empire. 
Moreover,  to  allow  the  Jews  to  return  home  would 
serve  a  double  purpose.  While  it  would  free  the 
Euphrates  Valley  from  a  constant  source  of  distress, 
it  would  plant  a  grateful,  and  therefore  loyal,  people 
on  the  western  confines  of  the  empire — perhaps,  as 
some  have  thought,  to  be  used  as  outworks  and  a  basis 
of  operations  in  a  projected  campaign  against  Egypt. 
Thus  a  far-sighted  statesman  might  regard  the  Hbera- 
tion  of  the  Jews  as  a  stroke  of  wise  policy.  But  we 
must  not  make  too  much  of  this.  The  restored  Jews 
were  a  mere  handful  of  religious  devotees,  scarcely  able 
to  hold  their  own  against  the  attacks  of  neighbouring 
villages  ;  and  while  they  were  permitted  to  build  their 
temple,  nothing  was  said  in  the  royal  rescript  about 
fortifying  their  city.  So  feeble  a  colony  could  not 
have  been  accounted  of  much  strategic  importance  by 
such  a  master  of  armies  as  Cyrus.  Again,  we  know 
from  the  "Second  Isaiah  "  that,  when  the  Persian  war- 
cloud  was  hovering  on  the  horizon,  the  Jewish  exiles 
hailed  it  as  the  sign  of  deliverance  from  persecution. 
The  invader  who  brought  destruction  to  Babylon  pro- 
mised relief  to  her  victims ;  and  the  lofty  strains  of  the 
prophet  bespeak  an  inspired  perception  of  the  situation 
which  encouraged  higher  hopes.  A  second  discovery 
in  the  buried  library  of  bricks  is  that  of  a  small  flat 
tablet,    also   recently   unearthed    like   the   cylinder   of 

2 


i8  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


Cyrus,  which  records  this  very  section  of  the  history  of 
Babylon.  Here  it  is  stated  that  Cyrus  intrigued  with 
a  disaffected  party  within  the  city.  Who  would  be 
so  likely  as  the  persecuted  Jews  to  play  this  part  ? 
Further,  the  newly  found  Babylonian  record  makes 
it  clear  that  Herodotus  was  mistaken  in  his  famous 
account  of  the  siege  of  Babylon  where  he  connected 
it  with  the  coming  of  Cyrus.  He  must  have  misappre- 
hended a  report  of  one  of  the  two  sieges  under  Darius, 
when  the  city  had  revolted  and  was  recaptured  by 
force,  for  we  now  know  that  after  a  battle  fought  in  the 
open  country  Cyrus  was  received  into  the  city  without 
striking  another  blow.  He  would  be  likel}^  to  be  in  a 
gracious  mood  then,  and  if  he  knew  there  were  exiles, 
languishing  in  captivity,  who  hailed  his  advent  as  that 
of  a  dehverer,  even  apart  from  the  question  whether 
they  had  previously  opened  up  negotiations  with  him, 
he  could  not  but  look  favourably  upon  them ;  so  that 
generosity  and  perhaps  gratitude  combined  with  good 
policy  to  govern  his  conduct.  Lastly,  although  he  was 
not  a  theological  reformer,  he  seems  to  have  been  of  a 
religious  character,  according  to  his  light,  and  there- 
fore it  is  not  unnatural  to  suppose  that  he  may  have 
heartily  thrown  himself  into  a  movement  of  which 
his  wisdom  approved,  and  with  which  all  his  generous 
instincts  S3'mpathised.  Thus,  after  all,  there  may  be 
something  in  the  old  view,  if  only  we  combine  it  with 
our  newer  information.  Under  the  peculiar  political 
circumstances  of  his  day,  Cyrus  may  have  been 
prepared  to  welcome  the  prophetic  assurance  that  he 
was  a  heaven-sent  shepherd,  if  some  of  the  Jews  had 
shown  it  him..  Even  without  any  such  assurance,  other 
conquerors  have  been  only  too  ready  to  flatter  them- 
selves that  they  were  executing  a  sacred  mission. 


Ezra  i.  I.]  CYRUS.  19 

These  considerations  do  not  in  the  least  degree  limit 
the  Divine  element  of  the  narrative  as  that  is  brought 
forward  by  the  Hebrew  historian.    On  the  contrary,  they 
give  additional  importance  to  it.     The  chronicler  sees  in 
the  decree  of  Cyrus  and  its  issues  an  accomplishment 
of  tlie  word  of  the    Lord  by  the   mouth  of  Jeremiah. 
Literally  he  says  that  what  happens  is  in  order  that 
the   word    of   the    Lord    may    be   bi'oitgJit    to   an    end. 
It  is  in  the    *^ fulness  of  the  time,"  as  the  advent    of 
Christ  was  later  in  another  relation.*    The  writer  seems 
to  have  in  mind  the  passage — "  And  this  whole  land 
shall    be    a    desolation,     and    an    astonishment ;    and 
these  nations  shall  serve  the  king  of  Babylon  seventy 
years.     And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  when  seventy  years 
are   accomplished,    that    I    will    punish    the    king    of 
Babylon,    and   that    nation,   saith    the    Lord,    for  their 
iniquity,   and  the    land    of  the  Chaldeans ;    and  I  will 
make   it   desolate   for   ever " ;  f    as   well    as    another 
prophecy — "  For  thus  saith    the    Lord,   After  seventy 
years  be  accomplished  for  Babylon,  I  will  visit  you,  and 
perform  My  good  word  toward  you,  in  causing  you  to 
return  to  this  place."  X     Now  if  we  do  not  accept  the 
notion    of  Josephus  that    Cyrus    was  consciously  and 
purposely  fulfilling  these  predictions,  we  do  not  in  any 
way  diminish  the  fact  that  the  deliverance  came   from 
God.     If  we  are  driven  to  the  conclusion   that  Cyrus 
was  not  solely  or  chiefly  actuated  by  religious  motives, 
or  even  if  we  take  his  action  to  be  purely  one  of  state 
policy,  the  ascription  of  this  inferior  position  to  Cyrus 
only  heightens  the  wonderful  glory  of  God's  overruling 
providence.     Nebuchadnezzar  was  described  as  God's 


Gal.  iv.  4.  J  Jer.  xxv.  ii,  12. 

X  Jcr.  xxix.  10. 


20       EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

"  servant "  *  because,  although  he  was  a  bad  man,  only 
pursuing  his  own  wicked  way,  yet,  all  unknown  to  him, 
that  way  was  made  to  serve  God's  purposes.  Similarly 
Cyrus,  who  is  not  a  bad  man,  is  God's  "  Shepherd," 
when  he  delivers  the  suffering  flock  from  the  wolf  and 
sends  it  back  to  the  fold,  whether  he  aims  at  obeying 
the  will  of  God  or  not.  It  is  part  of  the  great  revela- 
tion of  God  in  history,  that  He  is  seen  working  out 
His  supreme  purposes  in  spite  of  the  ignorance  and 
sometimes  even  by  means  of  the  malice  of  men.  Was 
not  this  the  case  in  the  supreme  event  of  history,  the 
crucifixion  of  our  Lord  ?  If  the  cruelty  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar and  the  feebleness  of  Pilate  could  serve  God,  so 
could  the  generosity  of  Cyrus. 

The  question  of  the  chronological  exactness  of  this 
fulfilment  of  prophecy  troubles  some  minds  that  are 
anxious  about  Biblical  arithmetic.  The  difficulty  is  to 
arrive  at  the  period  of  seventy  years.  It  would  seem 
that  this  could  only  be  done  by  some  stretching  at  both 
ends  of  the  exile.  We  must  begin  with  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's first  capture  of  Jerusalem  and  the  first  carrying 
away  of  a  small  body  of  royal  hostages  to  Babylon  in 
the  year  B.C.  6o6.  Even  then  we  have  only  sixty-eight 
years  to  the  capture  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus,  which 
happened  in  B.C.  538.  Therefore  to  get  the  full  seventy 
years  it  is  proposed  to  extend  the  exile  till  the  year 
B.C.  536,  which  is  the  date  of  the  commencement  of 
Cyrus's  sole  rule.  But  there  are  serious  difficulties  in 
these  suggestions.  In  his  prediction  of  the  seventy 
years  Jeremiah  plainly  refers  to  the  complete  overthrow 
of  the  nation  with  the  strong  words,  "  This  whole  land 
shall   be   a   desolation   and  an   astonishment."     As   a 

*  Jer.   xxvii.  6, 


Ezra  i.  i.]  CYRUS. 


matter  of  fact,  the  exile  only  began  in  earnest  with  the 
final  siege  of  Jerusalem,  which  took  place  in  B.C.  588. 
Then  Cyrus  actually  began  his  reign  over  the  Jews  in 
B.C.  538,  when  he  took  Babylon,  and  he  issued  his 
edict  in  his  first  year.  Thus  the  real  exile  as  a  national 
trouble  seems  to  have  occupied  fifty  years,  or,  reckoning 
a  year  for  the  issuing  and  execution  of  the  edict,  fifty- 
one  years.  Instead  of  straining  at  dates,  is  it  not  more 
simple  and  natural  to  suppose  that  Jeremiah  gave  a 
round  figure  to  signify  a  period  which  would  cover  the 
lifetime  of  his  contemporaries,  at  all  events  ?  However 
this  may  be,  nobody  can  make  a  grievance  out  of  the 
fact  that  the  captivity  may  not  have  been  quite  so 
lengthy  as  the  previous  warnings  of  it  foreshadowed. 
Tillotson  wisely  remarked  that  there  is  this  difference 
between  the  Divine  promises  and  the  Divine  threaten- 
ings,  that  while  God  pledges  His  faithfulness  to  the  full 
extent  of  the  former.  He  is  not  equally  bound  to  the 
perfect  accompHshment  of  the  latter.  If  the  question 
of  dates  shows  a  little  discrepancy,  what  does  this 
mean  but  that  God  is  so  merciful  as  not  always  to  exact 
the  last  farthing  ?  Moreover  it  should  be  remarked 
that  the  point  of  Jeremiah's  prophecy  is  not  the  exact 
length  of  the  captivity,  but  the  certain  termination  of  it 
after  a  long  while.  The  time  is  fulfilled  when  the  end 
has  come. 

But  the  action  of  Cyrus  is  not  only  regarded  as  the 
accomplishment  of  prophecy  ;  it  is  also  attributed  to  the 
direct  influence  of  God  exercised  on  the  Great  King, 
for  we  read  "  the  Lord  stirred  up  the  spirit  of  Cyrus 
king  of  Persia,"  etc.  It  would  indicate  the  radical 
scepticism  which  is  too  often  hidden  under  the  guise 
of  a  rigorous  regard  for  correct  belief,  to  maintain  that 
because  we  now  know  Cyrus  to  have  been  a  polytheist 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


his  spirit  could  not  have  been  stirred  up  by  the  true 
God.  It  is  not  the  teaching  of  the  Bible  that  God 
confines  His  influence  on  the  hearts  of  men  to  Jews 
and  Christians.  Surely  we  cannot  suppose  that  the 
Father  of  all  mankind  rigidly  refuses  to  hold  any  inter- 
course with  the  great  majority  of  His  children — never 
whispers  them  a  guiding  word  in  their  anxiety  and 
perplexit}^,  never  breathes  into  them  a  helpful  impulse, 
even  in  their  best  moments,  when  they  are  earnestly 
striving  to  do  right.  In  writing  to  the  Romans  St. 
Paul  distinctly  argues  on  the  ground  that  God  has 
revealed  Himself  to  the  heathen  world,*  and  in  the 
presence  of  Cornelius  St.  Peter  as  distinctly  asserts  that 
God  accepts  the  devout  and  upright  of  all  nations.! 
Here  even  in  the  Old  Testament  it  is  recognised  that 
God  moves  the  king  of  Persia.  This  affords  a  singular 
encouragement  for  prayer,  because  it  suggests  that  God 
has  access  to  those  who  are  far  out  of  our  reach  ;  that 
He  quite  sets  aside  the  obstruction  of  intermediaries — 
secretaries,  chamberlains,  grand-viziers,  and  all  the 
entourage  of  a  court ;  that  He  goes  straight  into  the 
audience  chamber,  making  direct  for  the  inmost  thoughts 
and  feelings  of  the  man  whom  He  would  influence.  The 
wonder  of  it  is  that  God  condescends  to  do  this  even 
with  men  Avho  know  little  of  Him  ;  but  it  should  be 
remembered  that  though  He  is  strange  to  many  men, 
none  of  them  are  strange  to  Him.  The  Father  knows 
the  children  who  do  not  know  Him.  It  may  be 
remarked,  finally,  on  this  point,  that  the  special 
Divine  influence  now  referred  to  is  dynamic  rather 
than  illuminating.      To  stir  up  the  spirit  is   to   move 


*    Rom.  i.  19. 
t    Acts  X.  34,  35. 


Ezra  i.  I.]  CYRUS.  23 


to  activity.  God  not  only  teaches ;  He  quickens.  In 
the  case  of  Cyrus,  the  king  used  his  own  judgment 
and  acted  on  his  own  opinions ;  yet  the  impulse  which 
drove  him  was  from  God.  That  was  everything.  We 
live  in  a  God-haunted  world  :  why  then  are  we  slow 
to  take  the  first  article  of  our  creed  in  its  full  meaning  ? 
Is  it  so  difficult  to  believe  in  God  when  all  history  is 
alive  with  His  presence  ? 


I 

I 


CHAPTER   III. 

THE  ROYAL   EDICT. 
Ezra  i.  2-4,  7-1 1. 

IT  has  been  asserted  that  the  Scripture  version  of 
the  edict  of  Cyrus  cannot  be  an  exact  rendering 
of  the  original,  because  it  ascribes  to  the  Great  King 
some  knowledge  of  the  God  of  the  Jews,  and  even  some 
faith  in  Him.  For  this  reason  it  has  been  suggested 
that  either  the  chronicler  or  some  previous  writer  who 
translated  the  decree  out  of  the  Persian  language,  in 
which  of  course  it  must  have  been  first  issued,  inserted 
the  word  Jehovah  in  place  of  the  name  of  Ormazd  or 
some  other  god  worshipped  by  Cyrus,  and  shaped  the 
phrases  generally  so  as  to  commend  them  to  Jewish 
sympathies.  Are  we  driven  to  this  position  ?  We 
have  seen  that  when  Cyrus  got  possession  of  Babylon 
he  had  no  scruple  in  claiming  the  indigenous  divinity 
Merodach  as  his  god.  Is  it  not  then  entirely  in  accord- 
ance with  his  eclectic  habit  of  mind — not  to  mention 
his  diplomatic  art  in  humouring  the  prejudices  of  his 
subjects — that  he  should  dravv^  up  a  decree  in  Vvhich  he 
designed  to  show  favour  to  an  exceptionally  religious 
people  in  language  that  would  be  congenial  to  them  ? 
Like  most  men  of  higher  intelligence  even  among 
polytheistic  races,  Cyrus  may  have  believed  in  one 
supreme    Deity,    who,    he   may   have    supposed,    was 


Ezrai.  2-4,  7-11]  THE   ROYAL   EDICT.  25 

worshipped  under  different  names  by  different  nations. 
The  final  clause  of  Ezra  i.  3  is  misleading,  as  it  stands 
in  the  Authorised  Version  ;  and  the  Revisers,  with  their 
habitual  caution,  have  only  so  far  improved  upon  it  as 
to  permit  the  preferable  rendering  to  appear  in  the 
margin,  where  we  have  generally  to  look  for  the 
opinions  of  the  more  scholarly  as  well  as  the  more 
courageous  critics.  Yet  even  the  Authorised  Version 
renders  the  same  words  correctly  in  the  very  next  verse. 
There  is  no  occasion  to  print  the  clause,  "  He  is  the 
God,"  as  a  parenthesis,  so  as  to  make  Cyrus  inform  the 
world  that  Jehovah  is  the  one  real  divinity.  The  more 
probable  rendering  in  idea  is  also  the  more  simple  one 
in  construction.  Removing  the  superfluous  brackets,  we 
read  right  on:  "He  is  the  God  which  is  in  Jerusalem" — 
i.e.y  we  have  an  indication  who  *'  Jehovah  "  is  for  the 
information  of  strangers  to  the  Jews  who  may  read 
the  edict.  With  this  understanding  let  us  examine 
the  leading  items  of  the  decree.  It  was  proclaimed  by 
the  mouth  of  king's  messengers,  and  it  was  also 
preserved  in  writing,  so  that  possibly  the  original 
inscription  may  be  recovered  from  among  the  burnt 
clay  records  that  lie  buried  in  the  ruins  of  Persian 
cities.  The  edict  is  addressed  to  the  whole  empire. 
Cyrus  announces  to  all  his  subjects  his  intention  to 
rebuild  the  temple  at  Jerusalem.  Then  he  specialises 
the  aim  of  the  decree  by  granting  a  licence  to  the  Jews 
to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  and  undertake  this  work.  It  is  a 
perfectly  free  offer  to  all  Jews  in  exile  without  excep- 
tion. "Who  is  there  among  you" — i.e.y  among  all 
the  subjects  of  the  empire — "  of  all  His  "  (Jehovah's) 
"people,  his  God  be  with  him,  and  let  him  go  up  to 
Jerusalem,"  etc.  In  particular  we  may  observe  the 
following  points : — 


26  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


First,  Cyrus  begins  by  acknowledging  that  "  the  God 
of  Heaven " — whom  he  identifies  with  the  Hebrew 
''  Jehovah,"  in  our  version  of  the  edict — has  given  him 
his  dominions.  It  is  possible  to  treat  this  introductory 
sentence  as  a  superficial  formula ;  but  there  is  no 
reason  for  so  ungenerous  an  estimate  of  it.  If  we 
accept  the  words  in  their  honest  intention,  we  must  see 
in  them  a  recognition  of  the  hand  of  God  in  the  setting 
up  of  kingdoms.  Two  opposite  kinds  of  experience 
awaken  in  men  a  conviction  of  God's  presence  in  their 
lives — great  calamities  and  great  successes.  The  influ- 
ence of  the  latter  experience  is  not  so  often  acknowledged 
as  that  of  the  former,  but  probably  it  is  equally  effective, 
at  least  in  extreme  instances.  There  is  something 
awful  in  the  success  of  a  world-conqueror.  When  the 
man  is  a  destroyer,  spreading  havoc  and  misery,  like 
Attila,  he  regards  himself  as  a  ''  Scourge  of  God  " ;  and 
when  he  is  a  vulgar  impersonation  of  selfish  greed  like 
Napoleon,  he  thinks  he  is  swept  on  by  a  mighty  tide  of 
destiny.  In  both  instances  the  results  are  too  stupen- 
dous to  be  attributed  to  purely  human  energy.  But  in 
the  case  of  Cyrus,  an  enlightened  and  noble-minded 
hero  is  bringing  Hberty  and  favour  to  the  victims  of 
a  degraded  tyranny,  so  that  he  is  hailed  by  some  of 
them  as  the  Anointed  King  raised  up  by  their  God,  and 
therefore  it  is  not  unnatural  that  he  should  ascribe  his 
brilliant  destiny  to  a  Divine  influence. 

Secondly,  Cyrus  actually  asserts  that  God  has 
charged  him  to  build  Him  a  temple  at  Jerusalem. 
Again,  this  m.ay  be  the  language  of  princely  courtesy  ; 
but  the  noble  spirit  which  breathes  through  the  decree 
encourages  us  to  take  a  higher  view  of  it,  and  to 
refrain  from  reading  minimising  comments  between 
the  lines.     It    is  probable   that  those  eager,   patriotic 


Ezra  i.  2-4,  7-1  ij  THE  ROYAL   EDICT.  27 


Jews  who  had  got  the  ear  of  Cyrus — or  he  would 
never  have  issued  such  a  decree  as  this — may  have 
urged  their  suit  b}^  showing  him  predictions  Hke  that 
of  Isaiah  xHv.  28,  in  which  God  describes  Himself  as 
One  "  that  saith  of  Cyrus,  He  is  My  shepherd,  and 
shall  perform  all  My  pleasure  :  even  saying  of  Jerusalem, 
Let  her  be  built;  and.  Let  the  foundations  of  the  temple 
be  laid."  Possibly  Cyrus  is  here  alluding  to  that 
very  utterance,  although,  as  we  have  seen,  Josephus  is 
incorrect  in  inserting  a  reference  to  Hebrew  prophecy 
in  the  very  words  of  the  decree,  and  in  suggesting  that 
the  fulfilment  of  prophecy  was  the  chief  end  Cyrus  had 
in  view. 

It  is  a  historical  fact  th?<-  ^ynr  ^H  iVItl  ^fti^^^'jl. 
the  templej  he  supplied  funds  from  the  public  treasury 
*1er*tlTatODject.  We  can  understand  his  motives  for 
doing  so.  If  he  desired  the  favour  of  the  God  of  the 
Jews,  he  would  naturally  aid  in  restoring  His  shrine. 
Nabonidas  had  fallen,  it  was  thought,  through  neglecting 
the  worship  of  the  gods.  Cyrus  seems  to  have  been 
anxious  to  avoid  this  mistake,  and  to  have  given  atten- 
tion to  the  cultivation  of  their  favour.  If,  as  seems 
likely,  some  of  the  Jews  had  impressed  his  mind  with 
the  greatness  of  Jehovah,  he  might  have  desired  to 
promote  the  building  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  with 
exceptional  assiduity. 

In  the  next  place,  Cyrus  gives  the  captive  Jews 
leave  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem.  The  edict  is  purely 
permissive.  There  is  to  be  no  expulsion  of  Jews 
from  Babylon.  Those  exiles  who  did  not  choose  to 
avail  themselves  of  the  boon  so  eagerly  coveted  by  the 
patriotic  few  were  allowed  to  remain  unmolested  in 
peace  and  prosperity.  The  restoration  was  voluntary. 
This  free  character  of  the  movement  would  give  it  a 


28  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

vigour  quite  out  of  proportion  to  the  numbers  of  those 
who  took  part  in  it,  and  would,  at  the  same  time,  ensure 
a  certain  elevation  of  tone  and  spirit.  It  is  an  image  of 
the  Divine  restoration  of  souls,  which  is  confined  to 
those  who  accept  it  of  their  own  free  will. 

Further,  the  object  of  the  return,  as  it  is  distinctly 
specified,  is  simply  to  rebuild  the  temple,  not — at  all 
events  in  the  first  instance — to  build  up  and  fortify  a 
city  on  the  ruins  of  Jerusalem;  much  less  does  it  imply 
a  complete  restoration  of  Palestine  to  the  Jews,  with  a 
wholesale  expulsion  of  its  present  inhabitants  from  their 
farms  and  vineyards.  Cyrus  does  not  seem  to  have  con- 
templated any  such  revolution.  The  end  in  view  was 
neither  social  nor  political,  but  purely  religious.  That 
more  would  come  out  of  it,  that  the  returning  exiles 
must  have  houses  to  live  in  and  must  protect  those 
houses  from  the  brigandage  of  the  Bedouin,  and  that 
they  must  have  fields  producing  food  to  support  them 
and  their  families,  are  inevitable  consequences.  Here 
is  the  germ  and  nucleus  of  a  national  restoration. 
Still  it  remains  true  that  the  immediate  object — the 
only  object  named  in  the  decree — is  the  rebuilding  of 
the  temple.  Thus  we  see  from  the  first  that  the  idea 
which  characterises  the  restoration  is  religious.  The 
exiles  return  as  a  Church.  The  goal  of  their  pilgrimage 
is  a  holy  site.  The  one  work  they  are  to  aim  at 
achieving  is  to  further  the  worship  of  their  God. 

Lastly,  the  inhabitants  of  the  towns  in  which  the 
Jews  have  been  settled  are  directed  to  make  contribu- 
tions towards  the  work.  It  is  not  quite  clear  whether 
these  ^'  Benevolences "  are  to  be  entirely  voluntary. 
A  royal  exhortation  generally  assumes  something  of 
the  character  of  a  command.  Probably  rich  men  were 
requisitioned  to  assist  in  providing  the  gold  and  silver 


Ezra  i.  2-4,  7-1 1.]  THE   ROYAL  EDICT.  29 


and  other  stores,  together  with  the  beasts  of  burden 
which  would  be  needed  for  the  great  expedition.  This 
was  to  supplement  what  Cyrus  calls  "  the  free-will 
offering  for  the  house  of  God  that  is  in  Jerusalem" — 
i.e.,  either  the  gifts  of  the  Jews  who  remained  in 
Babylon,  or  possibly  his  own  contribution  from  the 
funds  of  the  state.  We  are  reminded  of  the  Hebrews 
spoiling  the  Egyptians  at  the  Exodus.  The  prophet 
Haggai  saw  in  this  a  promise  of  further  supplies,  when 
the  wealth  of  foreign  nations  would  be  poured  into  the 
temple  treasury  in  donations  of  larger  dimensions  from 
the  heathen.  "  For  thus  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,"  he 
writes,  "  Yet  once,  it  is  a  httle  while,  and  I  will  shake 
the  heavens,  and  the  earth,  and  the  sea,  and  the  dry 
land  ;  .  .  .  and  the  desirable  things  of  all  nations  shall 
come,  and  I  will  fill  this  house  with  glory,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts.  The  silver  is  mine,  and  the  gold  is 
mine,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."  * 

The  assumed  willingness  of  their  neighbours  to  con- 
tribute at  a  hint  from  the  king  suggests  that  the  exiles 
were  not  altogether  unpopular.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  is  quite  possible  that,  under  the  oppression  of 
Nabonidas,  they  had  suffered  much  wrong  from  these 
neighbours.  A  pubhc  persecution  always  entails  a 
large  amount  of  private  cruelty,  because  the  victims  are 
not  protected  by  the  law  from  the  greed  and  petty  spite 
of  those  who  are  mean  enough  to  take  advantage  of 
their  helpless  condition.  Thus  it  may  be  that  Cyrus 
was  aiming  at  a  just  return  in  his  recommendation  to 
his  subjects  to  aid  the  Jews. 

Such  was  the  decree.  Now  let  us  look  at  the  execu- 
tion of  it. 

*  Hag.  ii.  6-8. 


30  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

In  the  first  place,  there  was  already  response  on  the 
part  of  some  of  the  Jews,  seen  especially  in  the  con- 
duct of  their  leaders,  who  "  rose  up,"  bestirring  them- 
selves to  prepare  for  the  expedition,  like  expectant 
watchers  released  from  their  weary  waiting  and  set 
free  for  action.  The  social  leaders  are  mentioned  first, 
which  is  a  clear  indication  that  the  theocracy,  so 
characteristic  of  the  coming  age,  was  not  yet  the  recog- 
nised order.  A  little  later  the  clergy  will  be  placed 
before  the  laity,  but  at  present  the  laity  are  still  named 
before  the  clergy.  The  order  is  domestic.  The  leaders 
are  the  heads  of  great  famihes — ''  the  chief  of  the 
fathers."  For  such  people  to  be  named  first  is  also  an 
indication  that  the  movement  did  not  originate  in  the 
humbler  classes.  Evidently  a  certain  aristocratic  spirit 
permeated  it.  The  wealthy  merchants  may  have  been 
loath  to  leave  their  centres  of  commerce,  but  the  nobility 
of  blood  and  family  were  at  the  head  of  the  crusade. 
We  have  not  yet  reached  the  age  of  the  democracy. 
It  is  clear,  further,  that  there  was  some  organisation 
among  the  exiles.  They  were  not  a  mere  crowd  of 
refugees.  The  leaders  were  of  the  tribes  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin.  We  shall  have  to  consider  the  relation  of 
the  Ten  Tribes  to  the  restoration  later  on ;  here  it  may 
be  enough  to  observe  in  passing  that  representatives 
of  the  Southern  Kingdom  take  the  lead  in  a  return  to 
Jerusalem,  the  capital  of  that  kingdom.  Next  come  the 
ecclesiastical  leaders,  the  priests  and  Levites.  Already 
we  find  these  two  orders  named  separately — an  impor- 
tant fact  in  relation  to  the  development  of  Judaism  that 
will  meet  us  again,  with  some  hints  here  and  there  to 
throw  light  upon  the  meaning  of  it. 

There  is  another  side  to  this  response.    It  was  by  no 
means  the  ^ase  that  the  whole  of  the  exiles  rose  up  in 


Ezra  i.  2-4,  7-1 1 •]  THE  ROYAL  EDICT.  31 

answer  to  the  edict  of  Cyrus ;  only  those  leaders  and 
only  those  people  responded  "  whose  spirit  God  had 
raised."  The  privilege  was  offered  to  all  the  Jews,  but 
it  was  not  accepted  by  all.  We  cannot  but  be  im- 
pressed by  the  religious  faith  and  the  inspired  insight 
of  our  historian  in  this  matter.  He  saw  that  Cyrus 
issued  his  edict  because  the  Lord  had  stirred  up  his 
spirit ;  now  he  attributes  the  prompting  to  make  use 
of  the  proffered  liberty  to  a  similar  Divine  influence. 
Thus  the  return  was  a  movement  of  heaven-sent 
impulses  throughout.  Ezekiel's  vision  of  the  dry  bones 
showed  the  deplorable  condition  of  the  Northern  King- 
dom in  his  day — stripped  bare,  shattered  to  fragments, 
scattered  abroad.  The  condition  of  Judah  was  only 
second  to  this  ghastly  national  ruin.  But  now  to  Judah 
there  had  come  the  breath  of  the  Divine  Spirit  which 
Ezekiel  saw  promised  for  Israel,  and  a  living  army  was 
rising  up  in  new  energy.  Here  we  may  discover  the 
deeper,  the  more  vital  source  of  the  return.  Without 
this  the  edict  of  Cyrus  would  have  perished  as  a  dead 
letter.  Even  as  it  was,  only  those  people  who  felt  the 
breath  of  the  Divine  afflatus  rose  up  for  the  arduous 
undertaking.  So  to-day  there  is  no  return  to  the 
heavenly  Jerusalem  and  no  rebuilding  the  fallen  temple 
of  human  nature  except  in  the  power  of  the  Spirit  of 
God.  Regeneration  always  goes  hand  in  hand  with  re- 
demption— the  work  of  the  Spirit  with  the  work  of  the 
Christ.  In  the  particular  case  before  us,  the  special 
effect  of  the  Divine  influence  is  "  to  raise  the  spirit  " — 
i.e.,  to  infuse  life,  to  rouse  to  activity  and  hope  and  high 
endeavour.  A  people  thus  equipped  is  fit  for  any 
expedition  of  toil  or  peril.  Like  Gideon's  little,  sifted 
army,  the  small  band  of  inspired  men  who  rose  up  to 
accept  the  decree  of  Cyrus  carried  within  their  breasts 


32  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

a  superhuman  power,  and  therefore  a  promise  of  ultimate 
success.  The  aim  with  which  they  set  out  confirmed 
the  religious  character  of  the  whole  enterprise.  They 
accepted  the  Hmitations  and  they  gladly  adopted  the 
one  definite  purpose  suggested  in  the  edict  of  Cyrus. 
They  proceeded  "  to  build  the  house  of  the  Lord  which 
is  in  Jerusalem."  This  was  their  only  confessed  aim.  It 
would  have  been  impossible  for  patriots  such  as  these 
Jews  were  not  to  feel  some  national  hopes  and  dreams 
stirring  within  them ;  still  we  have  no  reason  to  beHeve 
that  the  returning  exiles  were  not  loyal  to  the  spirit  of 
the  decree  of  the  Great  King.  The  religious  aim  was 
the  real  occasion  of  the  expedition.  So  much  the  more 
need  was  there  to  go  in  the  Spirit  and  strength  of  God. 
Only  they  whose  spirit  God  has  raised  are  fit  to  build 
God's  temple,  because  work  for  God  must  be  done  in 
the  Spirit  of  God. 

Secondly,  the  resident  neighbours  fell  in  with  the 
recommendation  of  the  king  ungrudgingly,  and  gave 
rich  contributions  for  the  expedition.  They  could  not 
go  themselves,  but  they  could  have  a  share  in  the  work 
by  means  of  their  gifts — as  the  home  Church  can  share 
in  the  foreign  mission  she  supports.  The  acceptance 
of  these  bounties  by  the  Jews  does  not  well  accord 
with  their  subsequent  conduct  when  they  refused  the 
aid  of  their  Samaritan  neighbours  in  the  actual  work 
of  building  the  temple.  It  has  an  ugly  look,  as  though 
they  were  willing  to  take  help  from  all  sources  excepting 
where  any  concessions  in  return  w^ould  be  expected 
on  the  part  of  those  w^ho  w^ere  befriending  them. 
However,  it  is  just  to  remember  that  the  aid  was 
invited  and  offered  by  Cyrus,  not  solicited  by  the 
Jews. 

Thirdly,  the  execution  of  the  decree  appears  to  have 


Ezrai.  2-4,  7-1^]  THE  ROYAL  EDICT.  33 

been  honestly  and  effectively  promoted  by  its  author. 
In  accordance  with  his  generous  encouragement  of  the 
Jews  to  rebuild  their  temple,  Cyrus  restored  the  sacred 
vessels  that  had  been  carried  off  by  Nebuchadnezzar 
on  the  occasion  of  the  first  Chaldsean  raid  on  Jerusalem, 
and  deposited  in  a  temple  at  Babylon  nearly  seventy 
years  before  the  time  of  the  return.  No  doubt  these 
things  were  regarded  as  of  more  importance  than  other 
spoils  of  war.  It  would  be  supposed  that  the  patron 
god  of  the  conquered  people  was  humiliated  when  the 
instruments  of  his  worship  were  offered  to  Bel  or  Nebo. 
Perhaps  it  was  thought  that  some  charm  attaching  to 
them  would  bring  luck  to  the  city  in  which  they  were 
guarded.  When  Nabonidas  was  seized  with  frantic 
terror  at  the  approach  of  the  Persian  hosts,  he  brought 
the  idols  of  the  surrounding  nations  to  Babylon  for  his 
protection.  The  reference  to  the  temple  vessels,  and 
the  careful  and  detailed  enumeration  of  them,  without 
the  mention  of  any  image,  is  a  clear  proof  that,  although 
before  the  captivity  the  majority  of  the  Jews  may  have 
consisted  of  idolaters,  there  was  no  idol  in  the  temple 
at  Jerusalem.  Had  there  been  one  there  Nebuchad- 
nezzar would  most  certainly  have  carried  it  off  as  the 
greatest  trophy  of  victory.  In  default  of  images,  he 
had  to  make  the  most  of  the  gold  and  silver  plate  used 
in  the  sacrificial  ceremonies. 

Viewed  in  this  connection,  the  restitution  of  the  stolen 
vessels  by  Cyrus  appears  to  be  more  than  an  act  of 
generosity  or  justice.  A  certain  religious  import  be- 
longs to  it.  It  put  an  end  to  an  ancient  insult  offered 
by  Babylon  to  the  God  of  Israel ;  and  it  might  be  taken 
as  an  act  of  homage  offered  to  Jehovah  by  Cyrus.  Yet 
it  was  only  a  restitution,  a  return  of  what  was  God's 
before,  and  so  a  type  of  every  gift  man  makes  to  God. 

3 


34  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


It  has  been  noticed  that  the  total  number  of  the 
vessels  restored  does  not  agree  with  the  sum  of  the 
numbers  of  the  several  kinds  of  vessels.  The  total  is 
5400 ;  but  an  addition  of  the  list  of  the  vessels  only 
amounts  to  2499.  Perhaps  the  less  valuable  articles 
are  omitted  from  the  detailed  account ;  or  possibly  there 
is  some  error  of  transcription,  and  if  so  the  question 
is,  in  which  direction  shall  we  find  it  ?  It  may  be 
that  the  total  was  too  large.  On  the  other  hand,  in 
I  Esdras  nearly  the  same  high  total  is  given — viz., 
5469 — and  there  the  details  are  made  to  agree  with  it 
by  an  evidently  artificial  manipulation  of  the  numbers.* 
This  gives  some  probability  to  the  view  that  the  total  is 
correct,  and  that  the  error  must  be  in  the  numbers  of 
the  several  items.  The  practical  importance  of  these 
considerations  is  that  they  lead  us  to  a  high  estimate 
of  the  immense  wealth  of  the  Old  Temple  treasures. 
Thus  they  suggest  the  reflection  that  much  devotion 
and  generosity  had  been  shown  in  collecting  such  stores 
of  gold  and  silver  in  previous  ages.  They  help  us  to 
picture  the  sumptuous  ritual  of  the  first  temple,  with 
the  *'  barbaric  splendour "  of  a  rich  display  of  the 
precious  metals.  Therefore  they  show  that  the  generosity 
of  Cyrus  in  restoring  so  great  a  hoard  was  genuine  and 
considerable.  It  might  have  been  urged  that  after  the 
treasures  had  been  lying  for  two  generations  in  a  heathen 
temple  the  original  owners  had  lost  all  claim  upon  them. 
It  might  have  been  said  that  they  had  been  contaminated 
by  this  long  residence  among  the  abominations  of 
Babylonian  idolatry.  The  restoration  of  them  swept 
away  all  such  ideas.  What  was  once  God's  belongs 
to  Him  by  right  for  ever.     His  property  is  inalienable ; 

*  I  Esdras  ii.  14, 


Ezrai.  2-4,  7-"]  THE  ROYAL   EDICT.  35 


His  claims  never  lapse  with  time,  never  fail  through 
change. 

It  is  not  without  significance  that  the  treasurer  who 
handed  over  their  temple-property  to  the  Jews  was 
named  ''  Mithredath  " — a  word  that  means  "  given 
by  Mithra,"  or  "devoted  to  Mithra."  This  suggests 
that  the  Persian  sun-god  was  honoured  among  the 
servants  of  Cyrus,  and  yet  that  one  who  by  name  at 
least  was  especially  associated  with  this  divinity  was 
constrained  to  honour  the  God  of  Israel.  Next  to 
Judaism  and  Christianity,  the  worship  of  Mithra  showed 
the  greatest  vitality  of  all  religions  in  Western  Asia,  and 
later  even  in  Europe.  So  vigorous  was  it  as  recently  as 
the  commencement  of  the  Christian  era,  that  M.  Renan 
has  remarked,  that  if  the  Roman  world  had  not  become 
Christian  it  would  have  become  Mithrastic.  In  those 
regions  where  the  dazzling  radiance  and  burning  heat 
of  the  sun  are  felt  as  they  are  not  even  imagined  in  our 
chill,  gloomy  climate,  it  was  naturally  supposed  that  if 
any  visible  God  existed  He  must  be  found  in  the  great 
fiery  centre  of  the  world's  light  and  life.  Our  own  day 
has  seen  the  scientific  development  of  the  idea  that  the 
sun's  force  is  the  source  of  all  the  energy  of  nature.  In 
the  homage  paid  by  one  of  the  ancient  followers  of 
Mithra,  the  sun-god,  to  the  God  of  Israel,  may  we 
not  see  an  image  of  the  recognition  of  the  claims  of 
the  Supreme  by  our  priests  of  the  sun — Kepler,  Newton, 
Faraday  ?  Men  must  be  more  blind  than  the  slaves 
of  Mithra  if  they  cannot  recognise  an  awful,  invisible 
energy  behind  and  above  the  forces  of  the  solar  system 
— nay  more,  a  living  Spirit — God  ! 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  SECOND  EXODUS. 
Ezra  ii.  1-67. 

THE  journey  of  the  returning  exiles  from  Babylon 
has  some  points  of  resemblance  to  the  exodus 
of  their  fathers  from  Egypt.  On  both  occasions  the 
Israelites  had  been  suffering  oppression  in  a  foreign 
land.  Deliverance  had  come  to  the  ancient  Hebrews  in 
so  wonderful  a  way  that  it  could  only  be  described  as  a 
miracle  of  God  :  no  material  miracle  was  recorded  of 
the  later  movement ;  and  yet  it  was  so  marvellously 
providential  that  the  Jews  were  constrained  to  acknow- 
ledge that  the  hand  of  God  was  not  less  concerned  in  it. 
But  there  were  great  differences  between  the  two 
events.  In  the  original  Hegira  of  the  Hebrews  a  horde 
of  slaves  was  fleeing  from  the  land  of  their  brutal 
masters ;  in  the  solemn  pilgrimage  of  the  second 
exodus  the  Jews  were  able  to  set  out  with  every 
encouragement  from  the  conqueror  of  their  national 
enemy.  On  the  other  hand,  while  the  flight  from 
Egypt  led  to  liberty,  the  expedition  from  Babylon  did 
not  include  an  escape  from  the  foreign  yoke.  The 
returning  exiles  were  described  as  *^  children  of  the 
province  "  * — i.e.^  of  the  Persian  province  of  Judaea — 

*  Ezra  ii.  i. 
36 


Ezra  ii.  1-67.]  THE  SECOND  EXODUS.  37 


and  their  leader  bore  the  title  of  a  Persian  governor.* 
Zerubbabel  was  no  new  Moses.  The  first  exodus 
witnessed  the  birth  of  a  nation ;  the  second  saw  only  a 
migration  within  the  boundaries  of  an  empire,  sanctioned 
by  the  ruler  because  it  did  not  include  the  deliverance 
of  the  subject  people  from  servitude. 

In  other  respects  the  condition  of  the  Israelites  who 
took  part  in  the  later  expedition  contrasts  favourably 
with  that  of  their  ancestors  under  Moses.  In  the  arts 
of  civilisation,  of  course,  they  were  far  superior  to  the 
crushed  Egyptian  bondmen.  But  the  chief  distinction 
lay  in  the  matter  of  religion.  At  length,  in  these  days 
of  Cyrus,  the  people  were  ripe  to  accept  the  faith  of  the 
great  teachers  who  hitherto  had  been  as  voices  crying 
in  the  wilderness.  This  fact  signalises  the  immense 
difference  between  the  Jews  in  every  age  previous  to 
the  exile,  and  the  Jews  of  the  return.  In  earlier 
periods  they  appear  as  a  kingdom,  but  not  as  a  Church; 
in  the  later  age  they  are  no  longer  a  kingdom,  but  they 
have  become  a  Church.  The  kingdom  had  been  mainly 
heathenish  and  idolatrous  in  its  religion,  and  most 
abominably  corrupt  in  its  morals,  with  only  a  thin 
streak  of  purer  faith  and  conduct  running  through  the 
course  of  its  history.  But  the  new  Church,  formed  out 
of  captives  purified  in  the  fires  of  persecution,  consisted 
of  a  body  of  men  and  women  who  heartily  embraced 
the  religion  to  which  but  few  of  their  forefathers  had 
attained,  and  who  were  even  ready  to  welcome  a  more 
rigorous  development  of  its  cult.  Thus  they  became 
a  highly  developed  Church.  They  were  consolidated 
into  a  Puritan  Church  in  discipHne,  and  a  High  Church 
in  ritual. 

*  Tirshatha.     Ezra  ii.  63. 


38  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  only  a  fraction  of  the 
Jews  in  the  East  went  back  to  Palestine.  Nor  were  they 
who  tarried,  in  all  cases,  the  more  worldly,  enamoured 
of  the  fleshpots.  In  the  Talmud  it  is  said  that  only 
the  chaff  returned,  while  the  wheat  remained  behind. 
Both  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  sprang  from  families  still 
residing  in  the  East  long  after  the  return  under  Zerub- 
babel. 

It  is  in  accordance  with  these  conditions  that  we 
come  across  one  of  the  most  curious  characteristics  of 
the  Books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah — a  characteristic  which 
they  share  with  Chronicles,  viz.,  the  frequent  insertion 
of  long  lists  of  names. 

Thus  the  second  chapter  of  Ezra  contains  a  list  of  the 
families  who  went  up  to  Jerusalem  in  response  to  the 
edict  of  Cyrus.  One  or  two  general  considerations 
arise  here. 

Since  it  was  not  a  whole  nation  that  migrated  from 
the  plains  of  Babylon  across  the  great  Syrian  desert, 
but  only  some  fragments  of  a  nation,  we  shall  not  have 
to  consider  the  fortunes  and  destinies  of  a  composite 
unity,  such  as  is  represented  by  a  kingdom.  The 
people  of  God  must  now  be  regarded  disjunctively.  It 
is  not  the  blessing  of  Israel,  or  the  blessing  of  Judah, 
that  faith  now  anticipates ;  but  the  blessing  of  those 
men,  women,  and  children  who  fear  God  and  walk  in 
His  ways,  though,  of  course,  for  the  present  they  are 
all  confined  to  the  limits  of  the  Jewish  race. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  this  in- 
dividualism was  not  absolute.  The  people  were  arranged 
according  to  their  families,  and  the  names  that  dis- 
tinguished the  families  were  not  those  of  the  present 
heads  of  houses,  but  the  names  of  ancestors,  possibly 
of  captives  taken  down  to  Babylon  by  Nebuchadnezzar. 


Ezra  ii.  1-67.]  THE  SECOND  EXODUS,  39 

As  some  of  these  names  occur  in  later  expeditions,  it  is 
plain  that  the  whole  of  the  families  they  represented 
were  not  found  in  the  first  body  of  pilgrims.  Still  the 
people  were  grouped  in  family  order.  The  Jews 
anticipated  the  modern  verdict  of  sociology,  that  the 
social  unit  is  the  fam.ily,  not  the  individual.  Judaism 
was,  through  and  through,  a  domestic  religion. 

Further,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  a  sort  of  caste  f&eling 
was  engendered  in  the  midst  of  the  dom-estic  arrange- 
ment of  the  people.  It  emerges  already  in  the  second 
chapter  of  Ezra  in  the  cases  of  families  that  could  not 
trace  their  genealogy,  and  it  bears  bitter  fruit  in  some 
pitiable  scenes  in  the  later  history  of  the  returned 
people.  Not  only  national  rights,  but  also  religious 
privileges,  come  more  and  more  to  depend  on  purity 
of  birth  and  descent.  Religion  is  viewed  as  a  question 
of  blood  relationship.  Thus  even  with  the  very  appear- 
ance of  that  new-born  individualism  which  might  be 
expected  to  counteract  it,  even  when  the  recovered 
people  is  composed  entirely  of  volunteers,  a  strong 
racial  current  sets  in,  which  grows  in  volume  until  in 
the  days  of  our  Lord  the  fact  of  a  man's  being  a  Jew  is 
thought  a  sufficient  guarantee  of  his  enjoying  the  favour 
of  Heaven,  until  in  our  own  day  such  a  book  as  "  Daniel 
Deronda  "  portrays  the  race-enthusiasm  of  the  Israelite 
as  the  very  heart  and  essence  of  his  religion. 

We  have  three  copies  of  the  list  of  the  returning 
exiles — one  in  Ezra  ii.,  the  second  in  Nehemiah  vii.,  and 
the  third  in  I  Esdras  v.  They  are  evidently  all  of  them 
transcripts  of  the  same  original  register ;  but  though 
they  agree  in  the  main,  they  differ  in  details,  giving 
some  variation  in  the  names,  and  considerable  diversity 
in  the  numbers — Esdras  coming  nearer  to  Ezra  than 
to  Nehemiah,  as  we  might  expect.     The  total,  however, 


40  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

is  the  same  in  every  case,  viz.,  42,360  (besides  7337 
servants) — a  large  number,  which  shows  how  important 
the  expedition  was  considered  to  be. 

The  name  of  Zerubbabel  appears  first.  He  was  the 
hneal  descendant  of  the  royal  house,  the  heir  to  the 
throne  of  David.  This  is  a  most  significant  fact.  It 
shows  that  the  exiles  had  retained  some  latent  national 
organisation,  and  it  gives  a  faint  political  character  to 
the  return,  although,  as  we  have  already  observed,  the 
main  object  of  it  was  religious.  To  fervent  readers  of 
old  prophecies  strange  hopes  would  dawn,  hopes  of  the 
Messiah  whose  advent  Isaiah,  in  particular,  had  pre- 
dicted. Was  this  new  shoot  from  the  stock  of  David 
indeed  the  Lord's  Anointed  ?  Those  who  secretly 
answered  the  question  to  themselves  in  the  affirmative 
were  doomed  to  much  perplexity  and  not  a  little  dis- 
appointment. Nevertheless  Zerubbabel  was  a  lower,  a 
provisional,  a  temporary  Messiah.  God  was  educating 
His  people  through  their  illusions.  As  one  by  one  the 
national  heroes  failed  to  satisfy  the  large  hopes  of  the 
prophets,  they  were  left  behind,  but  the  hopes  still 
maintained  their  unearthly  vitality.  Hezekiah,  Josiah, 
Zerubbabel,  the  Maccabees  all  passed,  and  in  passing 
they  all  helped  to  prepare  for  One  who  alone  could 
realise  the  dreams  of  seers  and  singers  in  all  the  best 
ages  of  Hebrew  thought  and  life. 

Still  the  bulk  of  the  people  do  not  seem  to  have  been 
dominated  by  the  Messianic  conception.  It  is  one 
characteristic  of  the  return  that  the  idea  of  the  personal, 
God-sent,  but  human  Messiah  recedes ;  and  another, 
older,  and  more  persistent  Jewish  hope  comes  to  the 
front — viz.,  the  hope  in  God  Himself  as  the  Saviour 
of  His  people  and  their  Vindicator.  Cyrus  could  not 
have  suspected  any  political  designs,  or  he  would  not 


Ezra  ii.  1-67.]  THE  SECOND  EXODUS.  41 

have  made  Zerubbabel  the  head  of  the  expedition. 
Evidently  "  Sheshbazzar,  the  prince  of  Judah,"  to  whom 
Cyrus  handed  over  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  temple,  is 
the  same  man  as  Zerubbabel,  because  in  v.  16  we  read 
that  Sheshbazzar  laid  the  foundation  of  the  temple, 
while  in  iii.  8  this  work  is  ascribed  to  Zerubbabel, 
with  whom  the  origin  of  the  work  is  again  connected 
in  V.  2. 

The  second  name  is  Jeshua.*  The  man  who  bears 
it  was  afterwards  the  high-priest  at  Jerusalem.  It  is 
impossible  to  say  whether  he  had  exercised  any  sacer- 
dotal functions  during  the  exile  ;  but  his  prominent 
place  shows  that  honour  was  now  offered  to  his  priest- 
hood.    Still  he  comes  after  the  royal  prince. 

Then  follow  nine  names  without  any  description.! 
Nehemiah's  list  includes  another  name,  which  seems  to 
have  dropped  out  of  the  list  in  Ezra.  These,  together 
with  the  two  already  mentioned,  make  an  exact  dozen. 
It  cannot  be  an  accident  that  twelve  names  stand  at 
the  head  of  the  list ;  they  must  be  meant  to  represent 
the  twelve  tribes — like  the  twelve  apostles  in  the 
Gospels,  and  the  twelve  gates  of  the  New  Jerusalem  in 
the  Apocalypse.  Thus  it  is  indicated  that  the  return  is 
for  all  Israel,  not  exclusively  for  the  Judaean  Hebrews. 
Undoubtedly  the  bulk  of  the  pilgrims  were  descendants 
of  captives  from  the  Southern  Kingdom. |  The  disper- 
sion of  the  Northern  Kingdom  had  begun  two  centuries 
earlier  than  Nebuchadnezzar's  invasion   of  Judaea;    it 


*  This  name  is  a  later  form  of  "  Joshua  " ;  the  older  form  of  the 
name  is  used  for  the  same  person  in  Hag,  i.  i,  14,  and  Zech.  iii.  i. 

f  Of  course  the  Nehemiah  and  Mordecai  in  this  list  are  different 
persons  from  those  who  bear  the  same  names  in  the  Books  of  Nehemiah 
and  Esther  and  belong  to  later  dates. 

X  See  Ezra  i.  5. 


42  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

had  been  carried  on  by  successive  removals  of  the 
people  in  successive  wars.  Probably  most  of  these 
early  exiles  had  been  driven  farther  north  than  those 
districts  which  were  assigned  to  the  Judaean  captives  ; 
probably,  too,  they  had  been  scattered  far  and  wide ; 
lastly,  we  know  that  they  had  been  sunken  in  an 
idolatrous  imitation  of  the  manners  and  customs  of 
their  heathen  neighbours,  so  that  there  was  little  to 
differentiate  them  from  the  people  among  whom  they 
were  domiciled.  Under  all  these  circumstances,  is  it 
remarkable  that  the  ten  tribes  have  disappeared  from 
the  observation  of  the  v/orld  ?  They  have  vanished, 
but  only  as  the  Goths  have  vanished  in  Italy,  as  the 
Huguenot  refugees  have  vanished  in  England — by 
mingling  with  the  resident  population.  We  have  not 
to  search  for  them  in  Tartary,  or  South  America,  or  any 
other  remote  region  of  the  four  continents,  because  we 
have  no  reason  to  believe  that  they  are  now  a  separate 
people. 

Still  a  very  small  "  Remnant "  was  faithful.  This 
*'  Remnant "  was  welcome  to  find  its  way  back  to 
Palestine  with  the  returning  Judaeans.  As  the  im- 
mediate object  of  the  expedition  was  to  rebuild  the 
temple  at  the  rival  capital  of  Jerusalem,  it  was  not 
to  be  expected  that  patriots  of  the  Northern  Kingdom 
would  be  very  eager  to  join  it.  Yet  some  descendants 
of  the  ten  tribes  made  their  way  back.  Even  in  New 
Testament  times  the  genealogy  of  the  prophetess  Anna 
was  reckoned  from  the  tribe  of  Asher.*  It  is  most 
improbable  that  the  twelve  leaders  were  actually  de- 
scendants of  the  twelve  tribes.  But  just  as  in  the 
case  of  the  apostles,  whom  we  cannot  regard  as  thus 

*  Luke  ii.  36. 


Ezra  ii.  1-67.]  THE  SECOND  EXODUS.  43 


descended,  they  represented  all  Israel.  Their  position 
at  the  head  of  the  expedition  proclaimed  that  the 
*' middle  wall  of  partition"  was  broken  down.  Thus 
we  see  that  redemption  tends  to  liberalise  the  redeemed, 
that  those  who  are  restored  to  God  are  also  brought 
back  to  the  love  of  their  brethren. 

The  list  that  follows  the  twelve  is  divisible  into  two 
sections.  First,  we  have  a  number  of  families ;  then 
there  is  a  change  in  the  tabulation,  and  the  rest  of  the 
people  are  arranged  according  to  their  cities.  The 
most  simple  explanation  of  this  double  method  is  that 
the  families  constitute  the  Jerusalem  citizens. 

The  towns  named  in  the  second  division  are  all 
situated  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem.  The  only 
part  of  Palestine  as  yet  restored  to  the  Jews  was 
Jerusalem,  with  the  towns  in  its  vicinity.  The 
southern  half  of  Judaea  remained  in  the  hands  of 
the  Edomites,  who  begrudged  to  the  Jews  even  the  re- 
sumption of  the  northern  portion — and  very  naturally, 
seeing  that  the  Edomites  had  held  it  for  half  a  century, 
a  time  which  gives  some  assurance  of  permanent  posses- 
sion. This  must  be  borne  in  mind  when  we  come 
across  the  troubles  between  the  returned  exiles  and 
their  neighbours  in  Palestine.  We  can  never  under- 
stand a  quarrel  until  we  have  heard  both  sides.  There 
is  no  Edomite  history  of  the  wars  of  Israel.  No  doubt 
such  a  history  would  put  another  face  on  the  events — 
just  as  a  Chinese  history  of  the  English  wars  in  the 
East  would  do,  to  the  shame  of  the  Christian  nation. 

After  the  leaders  and  the  people  generally  come  the 
successive  orders  of  the  temple  ministry.  We  begin 
with  the  priests,  and  among  these  a  front  rank  is  given 
to  the  house  of  Jeshua.  The  high-priest  himself  had 
been   named   earlier,    next  to   Zerubbabel,   among  the 


44  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

leaders  of  the  nation,  so  distinct  was  his  position  from 
that  of  the  ordinary  priesthood.  Next  to  the  priests 
we  have  the  Levites,  who  are  now  sharply  separated 
from  the  first  order  of  the  ministry.  The  very  small 
number  of  Levites  in  comparison  with  the  large  number 
of  priests  is  startling — over  four  thousand  priests  and 
only  seventy-four  Levites  !  The  explanation  of  this 
anomaly  may  be  found  in  what  had  been  occurring 
in  Chaldaea.  Ezekiel  declared  that  the  Levites  were 
to  be  degraded  because  of  their  sinful  conduct.*  We 
see  from  the  arrangement  in  Ezra  that  the  prophet's 
message  was  obeyed.  The  Levites  were  now  separated 
from  the  priests,  and  set  down  to  a  lower  function. 
This  could  not  have  been  acceptable  to  them.  There- 
fore it  is  not  at  all  surprising  that  the  majority  of  them 
held  aloof  from  the  expedition  for  rebuilding  the  temple 
in  sullen  resentment,  or  at  best  in  cool  indifference, 
refusing  to  take  part  in  a  work  the  issue  of  which 
would  exhibit  their  humiliation  to  menial  service.  But 
the  seventy-four  had  grace  to  accept  their  lowly  lot. 

The  Levites  are  not  set  in  the  lowest  place.  They 
are  distinguished  from  several  succeeding  orders.  The 
singers,  the  children  of  Asaph,  were  really  Levites  ;  but 
they  form  a  separate  and  important  class,  for  the 
temple  service  was  to  be  choral — rich  and  gladsomxe. 
The  door-keepers  are  a  distinct  order,  lowly  but  honour- 
able, for  they  are  devoted  to  the  service  of  God,  for 
whom  all  work  is  glorious. 

''They  also  serve  who  only  stand  and  wait." 
Next   come   the    Nethinims,  or  temple-helots.     These 
seem    to    have  been  aborigines  of  Canaan   who    had 
been  pressed  into   the    service    of  the   old   Jerusalem 

*  Ezek.  xliv.  9-16. 


Ezra  ii.  1-67.]  THE  SECOND  EXODUS.  45 

temple,  like  the  Gibeonites,  the  hewers  of  wood  and 
drawers  of  water.  After  the  Nethinims  come  "the 
children  of  Solomon's  servants,"  another  order  of 
slaves,  apparently  the  descendants  of  the  war  captives 
whom  Solomon  had  assigned  to  the  work  of  building 
the  temple.  It  shows  what  thorough  organisation  was 
preserved  among  the  captives  that  these  bondsmen 
were  retained  in  their  original  position  and  brought 
back  to  Jerusalem.  To  us  this  is  not  altogether 
admirable.  We  may  be  grieved  to  see  slavery  thus 
enhsted  in  the  worship  of  God.  But  we  must  recollect 
that  even  with  the  Christian  gospel  in  her  hand,  for 
centuries,  the  Church  had  her  slaves,  the  monasteries 
their  serfs.  No  idea  is  of  slower  growth  than  the  idea 
of  the  brotherhood  of  man. 

So  far  all  was  in  order ;  but  there  were  exceptional 
cases.  Some  of  the  people  could  not  prove  their 
Israelite  descent,  and  accordingly  they  were  set  aside 
from  their  brethren.  Some  of  the  priests  even  could 
not  trace  their  genealogy.  Their  condition  was  regarded 
as  more  serious,  for  the  right  of  office  was  purely 
hereditary.  The  dilemma  brought  to  light  a  sad  sense 
of  loss.  If  only  there  were  a  priest  with  the  Urim  and 
Thummim,  this  antique  augury  of  flashing  gems  might 
settle  the  difficulty !  But  such  a  man  was  not  to  be 
found.  The  Urim  and  Thummim,  together  with  the 
Ark  and  the  Shekinah,  are  named  by  the  rabbis 
among  the  precious  things  that  were  never  recovered. 
The  Jews  looked  back  with  regret  to  the  wonderful 
time  when  the  privilege  of  consulting  an  oracle  had 
been  within  the  reach  of  their  ancestors.  Thus  they 
shared  the  universal  instinct  of  mankind  that  turns 
fondly  to  the  past  for  memories  of  a  golden  age,  the 
glories  of  which  have  faded  and  left  us  only  the  dingy 


46  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


scenes  of  every-day  life.  In  this  instinct  we  may 
detect  a  transference  to  the  race  of  the  vaguely  perceived 
personal  loss  of  each  man  as  he  reflects  on  those  far-off, 
dream-like  child-days,  when  even  he  was  a  "mighty 
prophet,"  a  "seer  blest,"  one  who  had  come,  into  the 
world  ''  traihng  clouds  of  glory."  Alas !  he  perceives 
that  the  mystic  splendours  have  faded  into  the  light  of 
common  day,  if  they  have  not  even  given  place  to  the 
gloom  of  doubt,  or  the  black  night  of  sin.  Then,  taking 
himself  as  a  microcosm,  he  ascribes  a  similar  fate  to 
the  race. 

Nothing  is  more  inspiriting  in  the  gospel  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  than  its  complete  reversal  of  this  dismal 
process  of  reflection,  and  its  promise  of  the  Golden  Age 
in  the  future.  The  most  exalted  Hebrew  prophecy 
anticipated  something  of  the  kind  ;  here  and  there  it  Ht 
up  its  sombre  pages  with  the  hope  of  a  brilliant  future. 
The  attitude  of  the  Jews  in  the  present  instance,  when 
they  simply  set  a  question  on  one  side,  waiting  till  a 
priest  with  Urim  and  Thummim  should  appear,  suggests 
too  faint  a  belief  in  the  future  to  be  prophetic.  But 
like  Socrates'  hint  at  the  possibihty  of  one  arising  who 
should  solve  the  problems  which  were  inscrutable  to 
the  Athenians  of  his  day,  it  points  to  a  sense  of  need. 
When  at  length  Christ  came  as  "the  Light  of  the 
World,"  it  was  to  supply  a  widely  felt  want.  It  is  true 
He  brought  no  Urim  and  Thummim.  The  supreme 
motive  for  thankfulness  in  this  connection  is  that  His 
revelation  is  so  much  more  ample  than  the  v/izard 
guidance  men  had  formerly  clung  to,  as  to  be  like  the 
broad  sunshine  in  comparison  with  the  shifting  lights 
of  magic  gems.  Though  He  gave  no  formal  answers 
to  petty  questions  such  as  those  for  which  the  Jews 
would  resort  to  a  priest,  as  their  heathen  neighbours 


Ezra  ii.  1-67.]  THE  SECOND  EXODUS.  47 


resorted  to  a  soothsayer,  He  shed  a  wholesome  radiance 
on  the  path  of  life,  so  that  His  followers  have  come  to 
regard  the  providing  of  a  priest  with  Urirn  and  Thummim 
as  at  best  an  expedient  adapted  to  the  requirements  of 
an  age  of  superstition. 

If  the  caravan  lacked  the  privilege  of  an  oracle,  care 
was  taken  to  equip  it  as  well  as  the  available  means 
would  allow.  These  were  not  abundant.  There  were 
servants,  it  is  true.  There  were  beasts  of  burden  too — 
camels,  horses,  asses ;  but  these  were  few  in  comparison 
to  the  numbers  of  the  host — only  at  the  rate  of  one 
animal  to  a  family  of  four  persons.  Yet  the  expedition 
set  out  in  a  semi-royal  character,  for  it  was  protected 
by  a  guard  of  a  thousand  horsemen  sent  by  Cyrus. 
Better  than  this,  it  possessed  a  spirit  of  enthusiasm 
which  triumphed  over  poverty  and  hardship,  and  spread 
a  great  gladness  through  the  people.  Now  at  length 
it  was  possible  to  take  down  the  harps  from  the  willows. 
Besides  the  temple  choristers,  two  hundred  singing  men 
and  women  accompanied  the  pilgrims  to  help  to  give 
expression  to  the  exuberant  joyousness  of  the  host. 
The  spirit  of  the  whole  company  was  expressed  in  a 
noble  lyric  that  has  become  familiar  to  us  : — 

"  When  the  Lord  turned  again  the  captivity  of  Zion, 
We  were  like  unto  them  that  dream. 
Then  was  our  mouth  filled  with  laughter, 
And  our  tongue  with  singing  : 
Then  said  they  among  the  nations, 
The  Lord  hath  done  great  things  for  them. 
The  Lord  hath  done  great  things  for  us  ; 
Whereof  we  are  glad."  * 


*  Psalm  cxxvi.  1-3. 


CHAPTER   V. 

THE  NEW  TEMPLE. 

Ezra  ii.  68 — iii. 

UNLIKE  the  historian  of  the  exodus  from  Egypt, 
our  chronicler  gives  no  account  of  adventures 
of  the  pilgrims  on  the  road  to  Palestine,  although  much 
of  their  way  led  them  through  a  wild  and  difficult 
country.  So  huge  a  caravan  as  that  which  accom- 
panied Zerubbabel  must  have  taken  several  months  to 
cover  the  eight  hundred  miles  between  Babylon  and 
Jerusalem ;  *  for  even  Ezra  with  his  smaller  company 
spent  four  months  on  their  journey.f  A  dreary  desert 
stretched  over  the  vast  space  between  the  land  of 
exile  and  the  old  home  of  the  Jews  among  the  moun- 
tains of  the  West ;  and  here  the  commissariat  would 
tax  the  resources  of  the  ablest  organisers.  It  is  possible 
that  the  difficulties  of  the  desert  were  circumvented  in 
the  most  prosaic  manner — by  simply  avoiding  this 
barren,  waterless  region,  and  taking  a  long  sweep 
round  by  the  north  of  Syria.  Passing  over  the  pil- 
grimage, which  afforded  him  no  topics  of  interest,  with- 
out a  word  of  comment,  the  chronicler  plants  us  at  once 


*  I.e.t  if  the  route  was  the  usual  one,  by  Tadmor  (Palmyra).  The 
easier  but  roundabout  way  by  Aleppo  would  have  occupied  a  still 
longer  time. 

f  Ezra  vii.  8,  9. 

48 


Ezra  ii.  6S— iii.]  THE  NEW  TEMPLE.  49 


in  the  midst  of  the  busy  scenes  at  Jerusalem,  where 
we  see  the  returned  exiles,  at  length  arrived  at  the  end 
of  their  tedious  journey,  preparing  to  accomplish  the 
one  purpose  of  their  expedition. 

The  first  step  was  to  provide  the  means  for  building 
the  temple,  and  contributions  were  made  for  this  object 
by  all  classes  of  the  community — as  we  gather  from 
the  more  complete  account  in  Nehemiah  * —  from  the 
prince  and  the  aristocracy  to  the  general  public,  for  it 
was  to  be  a  united  work.  And  yet  it  is  implied  by  the 
narrative  that  many  had  no  share  in  it.  These  people 
may  have  been  poor  originally  or  impoverished  by  their 
journey,  and  not  at  all  deficient  in  generosity  or  lacking  in 
faith.  Still  we  often  meet  with  those  who  have  enough 
enthusiasm  to  applaud  a  good  work  and  yet  not  enough 
to  make  any  sacrifice  in  promoting  it.  It  is  expressly 
stated  that  the  gifts  were  offered  freely.  No  tax  was 
imposed  by  the  authorities  ;  but  there  was  no  backward- 
ness on  the  part  of  the  actual  donors,  who  were  impelled 
by  a  glowing  devotion  to  open  their  purses  without 
stint.  Lastly,  those  who  contributed  did  so  '^  after 
their  ability."  This  is  the  true  ''  proportionate  giving." 
For  all  to  give  an  equal  sum  is  impossible  unless  the 
poll-tax  is  to  be  fixed  at  a  miserable  minimum.  Even 
for  all  to  give  the  same  proportion  is  unjust.  There  are 
poor  men  who  ought  not  to  sacrifice  a  tenth  of  what 
they  receive  ;  there  are  rich  men  who  will  be  guilty 
of  unfaithfulness  to  their  stewardship  if  they  do  not 
devote  far  more  than  this  fraction  of  their  vast  revenues 
to  the  service  of  God  and  their  fellow-men.  It  would 
be  reasonable  for  some  of  the  latter  only  to  reserve 
the  tithe  for  their  own  use  and  to  give  away  nine-tenths 


Nch.  vii.  70-72. 


50  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

of  their  income,  for  even  then  they  would  not  be 
giving  "  after  their  abiht}'." 

After  the  prehminary  step  of  collecting  the  contri- 
butions, the  pilgrims  proceed  to  the  actual  work  they 
have  in  hand.  In  this  they  are  heartily  united ;  they 
gather  themselves  together  "  as  one  man  "  in  a  great 
assembly,  which,  if  we  may  trust  the  account  in  Esdras, 
is  held  in  an  open  space  by  the  first  gate  towards  the 
east,*  and  therefore  close  to  the  site  of  the  old  temple, 
almost  among  its  very  ruins.  The  unity  of  spirit  and 
the  harmony  of  action  v/hich  characterise  the  commence- 
ment of  the  v/ork  are  good  auguries  of  its  success. 
This  is  to  be  a  popular  undertaking.  Sanctioned  by 
Cyrus,  promoted  by  the  aristocracy,  it  is  to  be  carried 
out  with  the  full  co-operation  of  the  multitude.  The 
first  temple  had  been  the  work  of  a  king  ;  the  second 
is  to  be  the  work  of  a  people.  The  nation  had  been 
dazzled  by  the  splendour  of  Solomon's  court,  and  had 
basked  in  its  rays  so  that  the  after-glow  of  them 
lingered  in  the  memories  of  ages  even  down  to  the  time 
of  our  Lord.j  But  there  was  a  healthier  spirit  in  the 
humbler  work  of  the  returned  exiles,  when,  forced  to 
dispense  with  the  king  they  would  gladly  have  accepted, 
they  undertook  the  task  of  building  the  new  temple 
themselves. 

In  the  centre  of  the  mosque  known  as  the  ^'  Dome  of 
the  Rock  "  there  is  a  crag  with  the  well-worn  remains 
of  steps  leading  up  to  the  top  of  it,  and  with  channels 
cut  in  its  surface.  This  has  been  identified  by  recent 
explorers  as  the  site  of  the  great  Altar  of  Burnt- 
offerings.  It  is  on  the  very  crest  of  Mount  Moriah. 
Formerly  it  was  thought  that  it  was  the  site  of  the 
inmost  shrine  of  the   temple,   known   as  ''  The   Holy 

*  I  Esdras  v.  47.  f  Matt.  vi.  29. 


Ezra  ii.  68— iii.]  THE  NEW  TEMPLE. 


of  Holies,"  but  the  new  view,  which  seems  to  be  fairly 
established,   gives    an    unexpected    prominence    to   the 
altar.       This  rude  square   structure  of  unhewn   stone 
was  the  most  elevated  and  conspicuous  object  in  the 
temple.     The  altar  was  to  Judaism  what  the  cross  is 
to  Christianity.     Both  for  us  and  for  the  Jews  what  is 
most  vital  and  precious  in  religion  is  the  dark  mystery 
of  a  sacrifice.     The  first  work  of  the  temple  builders 
was  to  set  up  the  altar  again  on  its  old   foundation. 
Before  a  stone  of  the  temple  was  laid,  the  smoke  of 
sacrificial    fires    might    be    seen    ascending    to    heaven 
from  the   highest  crag  of  Moriah.     For  fifty  years  all 
sacrifices   had   ceased.      Now   with   haste,   in    fear   of 
hindrance   from  jealous  neighbours,  means  were  pro- 
vided to    re-establish    them    before    any    attempt    was 
made  to  rebuild  the  temple.     It  is  not  quite  easy  to  see 
what  the  writer  means  when,  after  saying  "  And  they 
set  the  altar  upon  his  bases,"  he  adds,   "  for  fear  was 
upon  them  because  of  the  people  of  those  countries." 
The  suggestion   that   the   phrase  may  be  varied  so  as 
to  mean  that   the  awe  which   this    religious  work  in- 
spired in  the  heathen  neighbours  prevented  them  from 
molesting  it  is  far-fetched  and  improbable.     Nor  is  it 
likely  that  the  writer  intends  to  convey  the  idea  that 
the  Jews  hastened  the  building  of  the  altar  as  a  sort  of 
Palladium,  trusting  that  its  sacrifices  would  protect  them 
in  case  of  invasion,  for  this  is  to  attribute  too  low  and 
m.aterialistic  a  character  to  their  religion.     More  reason- 
able is  the  explanation    that  they  hastened  the  work 
because  they  feared  that  their  neighbours  might  either 
hinder  it   or   wish  to  have  a  share  in  it — an  equally 
objectionable  thing,  as  subsequent  events  showed. 

The    chronicler  ^distinctly  states  that    the  sacrifices 
which  were  now  offered,  as  well  as  the  festivals  which 


52  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

were  established  later,  were  all  designed  to  meet  the 
requirements  of  the  law  of  Moses — that  everything  might 
be  done  ''  as  it  is  written  in  the  law  of  Moses  the  man 
of  God."  This  statement  does  not  throw  much  light 
on  the  history  of  the  Pentateuch.  We  know  that  that 
work  was  not  yet  in  the  hands  of  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem, 
because  this  was  nearly  eighty  years  before  Ezra  in- 
troduced it.  The  sentence  suggests  that  according  to 
the  chronicler  some  law  bearing  the  name  of  Moses 
was  known  to  the  first  body  of  returned  exiles.  We 
need  not  regard  that  suggestion  as  a  reflection  from 
later  years.  Deuteronomy  may  have  been  the  law 
referred  to ;  or  it  may  have  been  some  rubric  of 
traditional  usages  in  the  possession  of  the  priests. 

Meanwhile  two  facts  of  importance  come  out  here — 
first,  that  the  method  of  worship  adopted  by  the  returned 
exiles  was  a  revival  of  ancient  customs,  a  return  to  the 
old  ways,  not  an  innovation  of  their  own,  and  second^ 
that  this  restoration  was  in  careful  obedience  to  the 
known  will  of  God.  Here  we  have  the  root  idea  of  the 
Torah.  It  announces  that  God  has  revealed  His  will, 
and  it  implies  that  the  service  of  God  can  only  be 
acceptable  when  it  is  in  harmony  with  the  will  of  God. 
The  prophets  taught  that  obedience  was  better  than 
sacrifice.  The  priests  held  that  sacrifice  itself  was  a 
part  of  obedience.  With  both  the  primary  requisite  was 
obedience — as  it  is  the  primary  requisite  in  all  religion. 

The  particular  kind  of  sacrifice  offered  on  the  great 
altar  was  the  burnt-offering.  Now  we  do  occasionally 
meet  with  expiatory  ideas  in  connection  with  this 
sacrifice ;  but  unquestionably  the  principal  conception 
attached  to  the  burnt-offering,  in  distinction  from  the 
sin-offering,  was  the  idea  of  self-dedication  on  the  part 
of  the   worshipper.      Thus    the   Jews   re-consecrated 


Ezra  ii.  68— iii.]  THE  NEJV  TEMPLE.  53 


themselves  to  God  by  the  solemn  ceremony  of  sacrifice, 
and  they  kept  up  the  thought  of  renewed  consecration 
by  the  regular  repetition  of  the  burnt-offering.  It  is 
difficult  for  us  to  enter  into  the  feelings  of  the  people 
who  practised  so  antique  a  cult,  even  to  them  archaic 
in  its  ceremonies,  and  dimly  suggestive  of  primitive 
rites  that  had  their  origin  in  far-off  barbaric  times. 
But  one  thing  is  clear,  shining  as  with  letters  of  awful 
fire  against  the  black  clouds  of  smoke  that  hang  over 
the  altar.  This  sacrifice  was  always  a  *' whole  offering." 
As  it  was  being  completely  consumed  in  the  flames 
before  their  very  eyes,  the  worshippers  would  see  a 
vivid  representation  of  the  tremendous  truth  that  the 
most  perfect  sacrifice  is  death — nay,  that  it  is  even  more 
than  death,  that  it  is  absolute  self-effacement  in  total 
and  unreserved  surrender  to  God. 

Various  rites  follow  the  great  central  sacrifice  of  the 
burnt-offering,  ushered  in  by  the  most  joyous  festival 
of  the  year,  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  when  the  people 
scatter  themselves  over  the  hills  round  Jerusalem  under 
the  shade  of  extemporised  bowers  made  out  of  the 
leafy  boughs  of  trees,  and  celebrate  the  goodness  of 
God  in  the  final  and  richest  harvest,  the  vintage.  Then 
come  New  Moon  and  the  other  festivals  that  stud  the 
calendar  with  sacred  dates  and  make  the  Jewish  year 
a  round  of  glad  festivities. 

Thus,  we  see,  the  full  establishment  of  religious 
services  precedes  the  building  of  the  temple.  A  weighty 
truth  is  enshrined  in  this  apparently  incongruous  fact. 
The  worship  itself  is  felt  to  be  more  important  than  the 
house  in  which  it  is  to  be  celebrated.  That  truth  should 
be  even  more  apparent  to  us  who  have  read  the  great 
words  of  Jesus  uttered  by  Jacob's  well,  "  The  hour 
Cometh  when  neither  in  this  mountain,  nor  in  Jerusalem, 


54  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

shall  ye  worship  the  Father,  .  .  .  when  the  true  wor- 
shippers shall  worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  truth."  * 
How  vain  then  is  it  to  treat  the  erection  of  churches  as 
though  it  were  the  promotion  of  a  revival  of  religion  ! 
As  surely  as  the  empty  sea-shell  tossed  up  on  the 
beach  can  never  secrete  a  living  organism  to  inhabit  it, 
a  mere  building — whether  it  be  the  most  gorgeous 
cathedral  or  the  plainest  village  meeting-house — will 
never  induce  a  living  spirit  of  worship  to  dwell  in  its 
cold  desolation.  Every  true  religious  revival  begins  in 
the  spiritual  sphere  and  finds  i4:s  place  of  worship  where 
it  may — in  the  rustic  barn  or  on  the  hill-side — if  no 
more  seemly  home  can  be  provided  for  it,  because  its 
real  temple  is  the  humble  and  contrite  heart. 

Still  the  design  of  building  the  temple  at  Jerusalem 
was  kept  constantly  in  view  by  the  pilgrims.  Accordingly 
it  was  necessary  to  purchase  materials,  and  in  particular 
the  fragrant  cedar  wood  from  the  distant  forests  of 
Lebanon.  These  famous  forests  were  still  in  the 
possession  of  the  Phoenicians,  for  Cyrus  had  allowed 
a  local  autonomy  to  the  busy  trading  people  on  the 
northern  sea-board.  So  in  spite  of  the  king's  favour 
it  was  requisite  for  the  Jews  to  pay  the  full  price  for 
the  costly  timber.  Now,  in  disbursing  the  original 
funds  brought  up  from  Babylon,  it  would  seem  that 
the  whole  of  this  money  was  expended  in  labour,  in 
paying  the  wages  of  masons  and  carpenters.  There- 
fore the  Jews  had  to  export  agricultural  products- 
such  as  corn,  wine,  and  olive  oil — in  exchange  for  the 
imports  of  timber  they  received  from  the  Phoenicians. 
The  question  at  once  arises,  how  did  they  come  to  be 
possessed  of  these  fruits  of  the  soil  ?     The  answer  is 

*  John  iv.  21,  23. 


Ezra  ii.  68— iii.]  THE  NEIV   TEMPLE.  55 

supplied  by  a  chronological  remark  in  our  narrative. 
It  was  in  the  second  year  of  their  residence  in  Jerusalem 
and  its  neighbourhood  that  the  Jews  commenced  the 
actual  building  of  their  temple.  They  had  first  patiently 
cleared,  ploughed,  and  sown  the  neglected  fields,  trimmed 
and  trained  the  vines,  and  tended  the  olive  gardens,  so 
that  they  were  able  to  reap  a  harvest,  and  to  give  the 
surplus  products  for  the  purchase  of  the  timber  required 
in  building  the  temple.  As  the  foundation  was  laid  in 
the  spring,  the  order  for  the  cedar  wood  must  have 
been  sent  before  the  harvest  was  reaped — pledging  it 
in  advance  with  faith  in  the  God  who  gives  the  increase. 
The  Phoenician  woodmen  fell  their  trees  in  the  distant 
forests  of  Lebanon  ;  and  the  massive  trunks  are  dragged 
down  to  the  coast,  and  floated  along  the  Mediterranean 
to  Joppa,  and  then  carried  on  the  backs  of  camels  or 
slowly  drawn  up  the  heights  of  Judah  in  ox-waggons, 
while  the  crops  that  are  to  pay  for  them  are  still  green 
in  the  fields. 

Here  then  is  a  further  proof  of  devotion  on  the  part 
of  the  Jews  from  Babylon— though  it  is  scarcely  hinted 
at  in  the  narrative,  though  we  can  only  discover  it  by 
a  careful  comparison  of  facts  and  dates.  Labour  is 
expended  on  the  fields ;  long  weary  months  of  waiting 
are  endured  ;  when  the  fruits  of  toil  are  obtained,  these 
hard-earned  stores  are  not  hoarded  by  their  owners  : 
they  too,  like  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  wealthier  Jews, 
are  gladly  surrendered  for  the  one  object  which  kindles 
the  enthusiasm  of  every  class  of  the  community. 

At  length  all  is  ready.  Jeshua  the  priest  now 
precedes  Zerubbabel,  as  well  as  the  rest  of  the  twelve 
leaders,  in  inaugurating  the  great  work.  On  the 
Levites  is  laid  the  immediate  responsibility  of  carrying 
it  through.     When  the  foundation  is  laid,  the  priests 


56  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

in  their  new  white  vestments  sound  their  silver 
trumpets,  and  the  choir  of  Levites,  the  sons  of  Asaph, 
clang  their  brazen  cymbals.  To  the  accompaniment  of 
this  inspiriting  music  they  sing  glad  psalms  in  praise 
of  God,  giving  thanks  to  Him,  celebrating  His  good- 
ness and  His  mercy  that  endureth  for  ever  toward  Israel. 
This  is  not  at  all  like  the  soft  music  and  calm  chanting 
of  subdued  cathedral  services  that  we  think  of  in  con- 
nection with  great  national  festivals.  The  instruments 
blare  and  clash,  the  choristers  cry  aloud,  and  the  people 
join  them  with  a  mighty  shout.  When  shrill  discordant 
notes  of  bitter  wailing,  piped  by  a  group  of  melancholy 
old  men,  threaten  to  break  the  harmony  of  the  scene, 
they  are  drowned  in  the  deluge  of  jubilation  that  rises  up 
in  protest  and  beats  down  all  their  opposition  with  its 
triumph  of  gladness.  To  a  sober  Western  the  scene 
would  seem  to  be  a  sort  of  religious  orgy,  like  a  wild 
Bacchanalian  festival,  like  the  howling  of  hosts  of  der- 
vishes. But  although  it  is  the  Englishman's  habit  to 
take  his  religion  sombrely,  if  not  sadly,  it  may  be  well 
for  him  to  pause  before  pronouncing  a  condemnation  of 
those  men  and  women  who  are  more  exuberant  in  the 
expression  of  spiritual  emotion.  If  he  finds,  even 
among  his  fellow-countrymen,  some  who  permit  them- 
selves a  more  lively  music  and  a  more  free  method  of 
public  worship  than  he  is  accustomed  to,  is  it  not  a 
mark  of  insular  narrowness  for  him  to  visit  these  un- 
conventional people  with  disapprobation  ?  In  aban- 
doning the  severe  manners  of  their  race,  they  are  only 
approaching  nearer  to  the  time-old  methods  of  ancient 
Israel. 

In  this  clangour  and  clamour  at  Jerusalem  the  pre- 
dominant note  was  a  burst  of  irrepressible  gladness. 
When  God  turned  the  captivity  of  Israel,  mourning  was 


Ezra  ii.  68— iii.]  THE  NEW  TEMPLE.  57 

transformed   into   laughter.     To  understand    the  wild 
excitement  of  the  Jews,  their  paean  of  joy,  their  very 
ecstasy,  we  must  recollect  what  they  had  passed  through, 
as  w^ell  as  what  they  were  now  anticipating.     We  must 
remember  the  cruel  disaster  of  the  overthrow  of  Jeru- 
salem, the  desolation  of  the  exile,  the  sickness  of  weary 
waiting  for  deliverance,  the  harshness  of  the  persecution 
that  embittered  the  later  years  of  the  captivity  under 
Nabonidas ;  we  must  think  of  the  toilsome  pilgrimage 
through  the  desert,  with  its  dismal  wastes,  its  dangers 
and  its  terrors,  followed   by  the  patient  work  on  the 
land    and    gathering    in    of    means    for    building  the 
temple.     And   now  all  this  was  over.     The  bow  had 
been  terribly  bent  ;  the  rebound  was  immense.     People 
who  cannot  feel  strong  religious  gladness  have  never 
known   the  heartache  of  deep   religious   grief.     These 
Israelites  had  cried  out  of  the  depths  ;  they  were  pre- 
pared to  shout  for  joy  from  the  heights.     Perhaps  we 
may  go  further,  and  detect  a  finer  note  in  this  great 
blast  of  jubilation,  a  note  of  higher  and  more  solemn 
gladness.     The  chastisement  of  the  exile  was  past,  and 
the  long-suffering  mercy  of  God — enduring  for  ever — 
was  again  smiling  out  on  the  chastened  people.     And 
yet  the  positive  realisation  of  their  hopes  was  for  the 
future.      The  joy,    therefore,    was    inspired    by    faith. 
With  little   accomplished  as  yet,  the  sanguine  people 
already   saw   the  temple  in  their  mind's  eye,  with  its 
massive  walls,  its  cedar  chambers,  and  its  adornment 
of  gold  and  richly  dyed  hangings.    In  the  very  laying  of 
the  foundation  their  eager  imaginations  leaped  forward 
to  the  crowning  of  the  highest  pinnacles.     Perhaps  they 
saw  more  ;  perhaps  they  perceived,  though  but  dimly, 
something  of  the  meaning  of  the  spiritual  blessedness 
that  had  been  foretold  by  their  prophets. 


58  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH    AND  ESTHER. 

All  this  gladness  centred  in  the  building  of  a  temple, 
and  therefore  ultimately  in  the  worship  of  God.  We 
take  but  a  one-sided  view  of  Judaism  if  we  judge  it  by 
the  sour  ideas  of  later  Pharisaism.  As  it  presented 
itself  to  St.  Paul  in  opposition  to  the  gospel,  it  was 
stern  and  loveless.  But  in  its  earlier  days  this  religion 
was  free  and  gladsome,  though,  as  we  shall  soon  see, 
even  then  a  rigour  of  fanaticism  soon  crept  in  and 
turned  its  joy  into  grief.  Here,  however,  at  the  founding 
of  the  temple,  it  wears  its  sunniest  aspect.  There  is 
no  reason  why  religion  should  w^ear  any  other  aspect  to 
the  devout  soul.  It  should  be  happy ;  for  is  it  not  the 
worship  of  a  happy  God  ? 

Nevertheless,  in  the  midst  of  the  almost  universal 
acclaim  of  joy  and  praise,  there  was  the  note  of  sadness 
v/ailed  by  the  old  men,  who  could  recollect  the  venerable 
fane  in  which  their  fathers  had  worshipped  before  the 
ruthless  soldiers  of  Nebuchadnezzar  had  reduced  it  to 
a  heap  of  ashes.  Possibly  some  of  them  had  stood  on 
this  very  spot  half  a  century  before,  in  an  agony  of 
despair,  while  they  saw  the  cruel  flames  licking  the 
ancient  stones  and  blazing  up  among  the  cedar  beams, 
and  all  the  fine  gold  dimmed  with  black  clouds  of 
smoke.  Was  it  likely  that  the  feeble  flock  just  returned 
from  Babylon  could  ever  produce  such  a  wonder  of  the 
world  as  Solomon's  temple  had  been  ?  The  enthusiastic 
younger  people  might  be  glad  in  their  ignorance  ;  but 
their  sober  elders,  who  knew  more,  could  only  weep. 
We  cannot  but  think  that,  after  the  too  common  habit 
of  the  aged,  these  mournful  old  men  viewed  the  past  in 
a  glamour  of  memory,  magnifying  its  splendours  as 
they  looked  back  on  them  through  the  mists  of  time. 
If  so,  they  were  old  indeed  ;  for  this  habit,  and  not 
years,   makes  real  old  age.     He  is  aged  who  lives  in 


Ezra  ii.  68— iii.]  THE  NEIV  TEMPLE.  59 

bygone  days,  with  his  face  ever  set  to  the  irreparable 
past,  vainly  regretting  its  retreating  memories,  unin- 
terested in  the  present,  despondent  of  the  future.  The 
true  ehxir  of  life,  the  secret  of  perpetual  youth  of  soul, 
is  interest  in  the  present  and  the  future,  with  the 
forward  glance  of  faith  and  hope.  Old  men  who  culti- 
vate this  spirit  have  young  hearts  though  the  snow  is 
on  their  heads.  And  such  are  wise.  No  doubt,  from 
the  standpoint  of  a  narrow  common  sense,  with  its 
shrunken  views  confined  to  the  material  and  the  mun- 
dane, the  old  men  who  wept  had  more  reason  for  their 
conduct  than  the  inexperienced  younger  men  who  re- 
joiced. But  there  is  a  prudence  that  comes  of  bHndness, 
and  there  is  an  imprudence  that  is  sublime  in  its  daring, 
because  it  springs  from  faith.  The  despair  of  old  age 
makes  one  great  mistake,  because  it  ignores  one  great 
truth.  In  noting  that  many  good  things  have  passed 
away,  it  forgets  to  remember  that  God  remains.  God 
is  not  dead  !  Therefore  the  future  is  safe.  In  the  end 
the  young  enthusiasts  of  Jerusalem  were  justified.  A 
prophet  arose  who  declared  that  a  glory  which  the 
former  temple  had  never  known  should  adorn  the  new 
temple,  in  spite  of  its  humble  beginning  ;  and  history 
verified  his  word  when  the  Lord  took  possession  of  His 
house  in  the  person  of  His  Son. 


T 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  LIMITS   OF  COMPREHENSION. 
Ezra  iv.  1-5,  24. 

HE  fourth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Ezra  introduces 
the  vexed  question  of  the  limits  of  comprehension 
in  rehgion  by  affording  a  concrete  illustration  of  it  in  a 
very  acute  form.  Communities,  like  individual  organ- 
isms, can  only  Hve  by  means  of  a  certain  adjustment 
to  their  environment,  in  the  settlement  of  which  there 
necessarily  arises  a  serious  struggle  to  determine  what 
shall  be  absorbed  and  what  rejected,  how  far  it  is 
desirable  to  admit  aHen  bodies  and  to  what  extent  it 
is  necessary  to  exclude  them.  The  difficulty  thus 
occasioned  appeared  in  the  company  of  returned  exiles 
soon  after  they  had  begun  to  rebuild  the  temple  at 
Jerusalem.  It  was  the  seed  of  many  troubles.  The 
anxieties  and  disappointments  which  overshadowed  the 
subsequent  history  nearly  all  of  them  sprang  from  this 
one  source.  Here  we  are  brought  to  a  very  distin- 
guishing characteristic  of  the  Persian  period.  The  idea 
of  Jewish  exclusiveness  which  has  been  so  singular  a 
feature  in  the  whole  course  of  Judaism  right  down 
to  our  own  day  was  now  in  its  birth-throes.  Like  a 
young  Hercules,  it  had  to  fight  for  its  life  in  its 
very  cradle.  It  first  appeared  in  the  anxious  com- 
pilation of  genealogical  registers  and  the  careful  sifting 

60 


Ezra  iv.  1-5,  24.]    THE  LIMITS   OF  COMPREHENSION.         61 


of  the  qualifications  of  the  pilgrims  before  they  left 
Babylon.  In  the  events  which  followed  the  settlement 
at  Jerusalem  it  came  forward  with  determined  insist- 
ence on  its  rights,  in  opposition  to  a  very  tempting 
offer  which  would  have  been  fatal  to  its  very  existence. 
The  chronicler  introduces  the  neighbouring  people 
under  the  title  "The  adversaries  of  Judah  and  Ben- 
jamin "  ;  but  in  doing  so  he  is  describing  them  accord- 
ing to  their  later  actions  ;  when  they  first  appear  on 
his  pages  their  attitude  is  friendly,  and  there  is  no 
reason  to  suspect  any  hypocrisy  in  it.  We  cannot 
take  them  to  be  the  remainder  of  the  Israelite  inhabi- 
tants of  the  Northern  Kingdom  who  had  been  permitted 
to  stay  in  their  land  when  their  brethren  had  been 
violently  expelled  by  the  Assyrians,  and  who  were  now 
either  showing  their  old  enmity  to  Judah  and  Benjamin 
by  trying  to  pick  a  new  quarrel,  or,  on  the  other  hand, 
manifesting  a  better  spirit  and  seeking  reconciliation. 
No  doubt  such  people  existed,  especially  in  the  north, 
where  they  became,  in  part  at  least,  the  ancestors  of  the 
Galileans  of  New  Testament  times.  But  the  men  now 
referred  to  distinctly  assert  that  they  were  brought 
up  to  Palestine  by  the  Assyrian  king  Esar-haddon. 
Neither  can  they  be  the  descendants  of  the  Israelite 
priests  who  were  sent  at  the  request  of  the  colonists  to 
teach  them  the  religion  of  the  land  when  they  were 
alarmed  at  an  incursion  of  lions ;  *  for  only  one  priest 
is  directly  mentioned  in  the  history,  and  though  he  may 
have  had  companions  and  assistants,  the  small  college 
of  missionaries  could  not  be  called  ''the  people  of  the 
land"  (ver.  4).  These  people  must  be  the  foreign 
colonists.     There  were  Chaldaeans  from   Babylon  and 


*  2  Kings  xvii.  25-28, 


62  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

the  neighbouring  cities  of  Cutha  and  Sepharvaim  (the 
modern  Mosaib),  Elamites  from  Susa,  Phoenicians  from 
Sidon — if  we  may  trust  Josephus  here* — and  Arabs  from 
Petra.  These  had  been  introduced  on  four  successive 
occasions — first,  as  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  show,  by 
Sargon,  who  sent  two  sets  of  colonists ;  then  by  Esar- 
haddon  ;  and,  lastly,  by  Ashur-banipal.f  The  various 
nationalities  had  had  time  to  become  well  amalgamated 
together,  for  the  first  colonisation  had  happened  a  hun- 
dred and  eighty  years,  and  the  latest  colonisation  a 
hundred  and  thirty  years,  before  the  Jews  returned 
from  Babylon.  As  the  successive  exportations  of 
Israelites  went  on  side  by  side  with  the  successive 
importations  of  foreigners,  the  two  classes  must  have 
lived  together  for  some  time ;  and  even  after  the  last 
captivity  of  the  Israelites  had  been  effected,  those  who 
were  still  left  in  the  land  would  have  come  into  contact 
■with  the  colonists.  Thus,  apart  from  the  special 
mission  of  the  priest  whose  business  it  was  to  intro- 
duce the  rites  of  sacrificial  worship,  the  popular  religion 
of  the  Israelites  v/ould  have  become  known  to  the 
mixed  heathen  people  who  were  settled  among  them. 

These  neighbours  assert  that  they  worship  the  God 
whom  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem  worship,  and  that  they 
have  sacrificed  to  Him  since  the  days  of  Esar-haddon, 
the  Assyrian  king  to  whom,  in  particular,  they  attribute 
their  being  brought  up  to  Palestine,  possibl}^  because 
the  ancestors  of  the  deputation  to  Jerusalem  were 
among  the  colonists  planted  by  that  king.  For  a 
century  and  a  half  they  have  acknowledged  the  God  of 
the  Jews.  They  therefore  request  to  be  permitted  to 
assist  in  rebuilding  the  temple  at  Jerusalem.     At  the 

*  Ant.,  XII.  V.  5.  j  The  "Osnappai"  of  Ezra  iv.  10. 


Ezra  iv.  1-5,  24.]    THE  LIMITS   OF  COMPREHENSION.        63 


first  blush  of  it  their  petition  looks  reasonable  and  even 
generous.  The  Jews  were  poor ;  a  great  work  lay 
before  them  ;  and  the  inadequacy  of  their  means  in 
view  of  what  they  aimed  at  had  plunged  the  less  en- 
thusiastic among  them  into  grief  and  despair.  Here 
was  an  offer  of  assistance  that  might  prove  most  effi- 
cacious. The  idea  of  centralisation  in  v/orship  of  which 
Josiah  had  made  so  much  would  be  furthered  by  this 
means,  because  instead  of  following  the  example  of  the 
Israelites  before  the  exile  who  had  their  altar  at  Bethel, 
the  colonists  proposed  to  take  part  in  the  erection  of 
the  one  Jewish  temple  at  Jerusalem.  If  their  previous 
habit  of  offering  sacrifices  in  their  own  territory  was 
offensive  to  rigorous  Jews,  although  they  might  speak 
of  it  quite  naively,  because  they  were  unconscious  that 
there  was  anything  objectionable  in  it  and  even 
regard  it  as  meritorious,  the  very  way  to  abolish 
this  ancient  custom  was  to  give  the  colonists  an  interest 
in  the  central  shrine.  If  their  religion  was  defective, 
how  could  it  be  improved  better  than  by  bringing  them 
into  contact  with  the  law-abiding  Jews  ?  While  the 
offer  of  the  colonists  promised  aid  to  the  Jews  in  build- 
ing the  temple,  it  also  afforded  them  a  grand  missionary 
opportunity  for  carrying  out  the  broad  programme  of 
the  Second  Isaiah,  who  had  promised  the  spread  of  the 
light  of  God's  grace  among  the  Gentiles. 

In  view  of  these  considerations  we  cannot  but  read 
the  account  of  the  absolute  rejection  of  the  offer  by 
Zerubbabel,  Jeshua,  and  the  rest  of  the  twelve  leaders 
with  a  sense  of  painful  disappointment.  The  less 
pleasing  side  of  religious  intensity  here  presents  itself. 
Zeal  seems  to  be  passing  into  fanaticism.  A  selfish 
element  mars  the  picture  of  whole-hearted  devotion 
which  was  so  delightfully  portrayed  in   the  history  of 


64  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

the  returned  exiles  up  to  this  time.  The  leaders  are 
cautious  enough  to  couch  their  answer  in  terms  that 
seem  to  hint  at  their  inability  to  comply  with  the 
friendly  request  of  their  neighbours,  however  much 
they  may  wish  to  do  so,  because  of  the  limitation 
imposed  upon  them  in  the  edict  of  Cyrus  which 
confined  the  command  to  build  the  temple  at  Jerusalem 
to  the  Jews.  But  it  is  evident  that  the  secret  of 
the  refusal  is  in  the  mind  and  will  of  the  Jews  them- 
selves. They  absolutely  decline  any  co-operation  with 
the  colonists.  There  is  a  sting  in  the  carefully  chosen 
language  with  which  they  define  their  work :  they  call 
it  building  a  house  ''  unto  our  God."  Thus  they  not 
only  accept  the  polite  phrase  "  Your  God  "  employed 
by  the  colonists  in  addressing  them  ;  but  by  markedly 
accentuating  its  limitation  they  disallow  any  right  of  the 
colonists  to  claim  the  same  divinity. 

Such  a  curt  refusal  of  friendly  overtures  was  naturally 
most  offensive  to  the  people  who  received  it.  But  their 
subsequent  conduct  was  so  bitterly  ill-natured  that  we 
are  driven  to  think  they  must  have  had  some  selfish 
aims  from  the  first.  They  at  once  set  some  paid  agents 
to  work  at  court  to  poison  the  mind  of  the  government 
with  calumnies  about  the  Jews.  It  is  scarcely  likely 
that  they  were  able  to  win  Cyrus  over  to  their  side 
against  his  favourite  proteges.  The  king  may  have  been 
too  absorbed  with  the  great  affairs  of  his  vast  dominions 
for  any  murmur  of  this  business  to  reach  him  while  it 
was  being  disposed  of  by  some  official.  But  perhaps 
the  matter  did  not  come  up  till  after  Cyrus  had  handed 
over  the  government  to  his  son  Cambyses,  which  he  did 
in  the  year  b.c.  532 — three  years  before  his  death.  At  all 
events  the  calumnies  were  successful.  The  work  of  the 
temple  building  was  arrested  at  its  very  commencement 


Ezra  iv.  1-5,  24.]     THE  LIMITS   OF  COMPREHENSION.       65 


— for  as  yet  little  more  had  been  done  beyond  collecting 
materials.  The  Jews  were  paying  dearly  for  their  ex- 
clusiveness. 

All  this  looks  very  miserable.     But  let  us  examine 
the  situation. 

We  should  show  a  total  lack  of  the  historical  spirit 
if  we  were  to  judge  the  conduct  of  Zerubbabel  and 
his  companions  by  the  broad  principles  of  Christian 
liberalism.  We  must  take  into  account  their  religious 
training  and  the  measure  of  light  to  which  they  had 
attained.  We  must  also  consider  the  singularly  difficult 
position  in  which  they  were  placed.  They  were  not 
a  nation  ;  they  were  a  Church.  Their  very  existence, 
therefore,  depended  upon  a  certain  ecclesiastical  organi- 
sation. They  must  have  shaped  themselves  according 
to  some  definite  lines,  or  they  would  have  melted  away 
into  the  mass  of  mixed  nationalities  and  debased  eclectic 
religions  with  which  they  were  'surrounded.  Whether 
the  course  of  personal  exclusiveness  which  they  chose 
was  wisest  and  best  may  be  fairly  questioned.  It  has 
been  the  course  followed  by  their  children  all  through 
the  centuries,  and  it  has  acquired  this  much  of  justifi- 
cation— it  has  succeeded.  Judaism  has  been  pre- 
served by  Jewish  exclusiveness.  We  may  think  that 
the  essential  truths  of  Judaism  might  have  been  main- 
tained by  other  means  which  would  have  allowed  of 
a  more  gracious  treatment  of  outsiders.  Meanwhile, 
however,  we  must  see  that  Zerubbabel  and  his  com- 
panions were  not  simply  indulging  in  churlish  unsocia- 
bihty  when  they  rejected  the  request  of  their  neighbours. 
Rightly  or  wrongly,  they  took  this  disagreeable  course 
with  a  great  purpose  in  mind. 

Then  we  must  understand  what  the  request  of  the 
colonists  really  involved.     It  is  true  they  only  asked 

5 


66  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

to  be  allowed  to  assist  in  building  the  temple.  But  it 
would  have  been  impossible  to  stay  here.  If  they  had 
taken  an  active  share  in  the  labour  and  sacrifice  of  the 
construction  of  the  temple,  they  could  not  have  been 
excluded  afterwards  from  taking  part  in  the  temple 
worship.  This  is  the  more  clear  since  the  very  grounds 
of  their  request  were  that  they  worshipped  and  sacri- 
ficed to  the  God  of  the  Jews.  Now  a  great  prophet 
had  predicted  that  God's  house  was  to  be  a  home  of 
prayer  for  all  nations.*  But  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem 
belonged  to  a  very  different  school  of  thought.  With 
them,  as  we  have  learnt  from  the  genealogies,  the 
racial  idea  was  predominant.  Judaism  was  for  the 
Jews. 

But  let  us  understand  what  that  religion  was  which 
the  colonists  asserted  to  be  identical  with  the  rehgion 
of  the  returned  exiles.  They  said  they  worshipped  the 
God  of  the  Jews,  but  it  was  after  the  manner  of  the 
people  of  the  Northern  Kingdom.  In  the  days  of 
the  Israelites  that  worship  had  been  associated  with 
the  steer  at  Bethel,  and  the  people  of  Jerusalem  had 
condemned  the  degenerate  religion  of  their  northern 
brethren  as  sinful  in  the  sight  of  God.  But  the  colonists 
had  not  confined  themselves  to  this.  They  had  com- 
bined their  old  idolatrous  religion  with  that  of  the 
newly  adopted  indigenous  divinity  of  Palestine.  '*  They 
feared  the  Lord,  and  served  their  own  gods."  f  Between 
them,  they  adored  a  host  of  Pagan  divinities,  whose 
barbarous  names  are  grimly  noted  by  the  Hebrew  his- 
torian— Succoth-benoth,  Nergal,  Ashima,  etc.J  There 
is  no  evidence  to  show  that  this  heathenism  had  become 


*  Isa.  Ivi.  7.  f  2  Kings  xvii.  ^2)' 

%  2  Kings  xvii.  30,  31. 


Ezra  iv.  1-5,  24.]     THE  LIMITS   OF  COMPREHENSION.       67 


extinct  by  the  time  of  the  rebuilding  of  the  Jerusalem 
temple.  At  all  events,  the  bastard  product  of  such  a 
worship  as  that  of  the  Bethel  steer  and  the  Babylonian 
and  Phoenician  divinities,  even  when  purged  of  its  most 
gross  corruption,  was  not  likely  to  be  after  the  mind  of 
the  puritan  pilgrims.  The  colonists  did  not  offer  to 
adopt  the  traditional  Torah,  which  the  returned  exiles 
were  sedulously  observing. 

Still  it  may  be  said,  if  the  people  were  imperfect  in 
knowledge  and  corrupt  in  practice,  might  not  the  Jews 
have  enlightened  and  helped  them  ?  We  are  reminded 
of  the  reproach  that  Bede  brings  so  sternly  against 
the  ancient  British  Christians  when  he  blames  them  for 
not  having  taught  the  gospel  to  the  Saxon  heathen  who 
had  invaded  their  land.  How  far  it  would  have  been 
possible  for  a  feeble  people  to  evangelise  their  more 
powerful  neighbours,  in  either  case,  it  is  impossible 
to  say. 

It  cannot  be  denied,  however,  that  in  their  refusal  the 
Jews  gave  prominence  to  racial  and  not  to  religious 
distinctions.  Yet  even  in  this  matter  it  would  be  Un- 
reasonable for  us  to  expect  them  to  have  surpassed 
the  early  Christian  Church  at  Jerusalem  and  to  have 
anticipated  the  daring  liberalism  of  St.  Paul.  The 
followers  of  St.  James  were  reluctant  to  receive  any 
converts  into  their  communion  except  on  condition  of 
circumcision.  This  meant  that  Gentiles  must  become 
Jews  before  they  could  be  recognised  as  Christians. 
Now  there  was  no  sign  that  the  mixed  race  of  colonists 
ever  contemplated  becoming  Jews  by  humbling  them- 
selves to  a  rite  of  initiation.  Even  if  most  of  them  were 
already  circumcised,  as  far  as  we  know  none  of  them 
gave  an  indication  of  willingness  to  subject  themselves 
wholly  to  Jewish  ordinances.     To  receive  them,  there- 


68  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

fore,  would  be  contrary  to  the  root  principle  of  Judaism. 
It  is  not  fair  to  mete  out  a  harsh  condemnation  to  Jews 
who  declined  to  do  what  was  only  allowed  among 
Christians  after  a  desperate  struggle,  which  separated 
the  leader  of  the  liberal  party  from  many  of  his 
brethren  and  left  him  for  a  long  while  under  a  cloud 
of  suspicion. 

Great  confusion  has  been  imported  into  the  contro- 
versy on  Church  comprehension  by  not  keeping  it 
separate  from  the  question  of  tolerance  in  religion. 
The  two  are  distinct  in  many  respects.  Comprehension 
is  an  ecclesiastical  matter  ;  tolerance  is  primarily  con- 
cerned with  the  poHcy  of  the  state.  Whilst  it  is 
admitted  that  nobody  should  be  coerced  in  his  religion 
by  the  state,  it  is  not  therefore  to  be  assumed  that 
everybody  is  to  be  received  into  the  Church. 

Nevertheless  we  feel  that  there  is  a  real  and  vital 
connection  between  the  ideas  of  toleration  and  Church 
comprehensiveness.  A  Church  may  become  culpably 
intolerant,  although  she  may  not  use  the  power  of  the 
state  for  the  execution  of  her  mandates ;  she  may  con- 
trive many  painful  forms  of  persecution,  without  resort- 
ing to  the  rack  and  the  thumb-screw.  The  question 
therefore  arises,  What  are  the  limits  to  tolerance  within 
a  Church  ?  The  attempt  to  fix  these  Hmits  by  creeds 
and  canons  has  not  been  wholly  successful,  either  in 
excluding  the  unworthy  or  in  including  the  most  desir- 
able members.  The  drift  of  thought  in  the  present  day 
being  towards  wider  comprehensiveness,  it  becomes 
increasingly  desirable  to  determine  on  what  principles 
this  may  be  attained.  Good  men  are  weary  of  the 
little  garden  walled  around,  and  they  doubt  whether  it  is 
altogether  the  Lord's  peculiar  ground ;  they  have  dis- 
covered that  many  of  the  flowers  of  the  field  are  fair 


Ezra  iv.  1-5,  24.I    THE  LIMITS   OF  COMPREHENSION.        69 


and  fragrant,  and  they  have  a  keen  suspicion  that 
not  a  few  weeds  may  be  lurking  even  in  the  trim 
parterre ;  so  they  look  over  the  wall  and  long  for 
breadth  and  brotherhood,  in  a  larger  recognition  of  all 
that  is  good  in  the  world.  Now  the  dull  religious 
lethargy  of  the  eighteenth  century  is  a  warning  against 
the  chief  danger  that  threatens  those  who  yield  them- 
selves to  this  fascinating  impulse.  Latitudinarianism 
sought  to  widen  the  fold  that  had  been  narrowed  on 
one  side  by  sacerdotal  pretensions  and  on  the  other 
side  by  puritan  rigour.  The  result  was  that  the  fold 
almost  disappeared.  Then  religion  was  nearly  swallowed 
up  in  the  swamps  of  indifference.  This  deplorable 
issue  of  a  well-meant  attempt  to  serve  the  cause  of 
charity  suggests  that  there  is  Httle  good  in  breaking 
down  the  barriers  of  exclusiveness  unless  we  have  first 
established  a  potent  centre  of  unity.  If  we  have  put 
an  end  to  division  simply  by  destroying  the  interests 
which  once  divided  men,  we  have  only  attained  the 
communion  of  death.  In  the  graveyard  friend  and  foe 
lie  peaceably  side  by  side,  but  only  because  both  are 
dead.  Wherever  there  is  life  two  opposite  influences 
are  invariably  at  work.  There  is  a  force  of  attraction 
drawing  in  all  that  is  congenial,  and  there  is  a  force 
of  a  contrary  character  repelling  everything  that  is 
uncongenial.  Any  attempt  to  tamper  with  either  of 
these  forces  must  result  in  disaster.  A  social  or  an 
ecclesiastical  division  that  arbitrarily  crosses  the  lines  of 
natural  affinity  creates  a  schism  in  the  body,  and  leads 
to  a  painful  mutilation  of  fellowship.  On  the  other 
hand,  a  forced  comprehension  of  alien  elements  produces 
internal  friction,  which  often  leads  to  an  explosion, 
shattering  the  whole  fabric.  But  the  common  mistake 
has  been  in  attending  to  the  circumference  and  neglect- 


70  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


ing  the  centre,  in  beating  the  bounds  of  the  parish 
instead  of  fortifying  the  citadel.  The  Hberahsm  of  St. 
Paul  was  not  latitudinarian,  because  it  was  inspired  by 
a  vital  principle  which  served  as  the  centre  of  all  his 
teaching.  He  preached  liberty  and  comprehensiveness, 
because  he  had  first  preached  Christ.  In  Christ  he 
found  at  once  a  bond  of  union  and  an  escape  from 
narrowness.  The  middle  wall  of  partition  was  broken 
down,  not  by  a  Vandal  armed  with  nothing  better 
than  the  besom  of  destruction,  but  by  the  Founder  of 
a  new  kingdom,  who  could  dispense  with  artificial 
restrictions  because  He  could  draw  all  men  unto 
Himself. 

Unfortunately  the  returned  captives  at  Jerusalem  did 
not  feel  conscious  of  any  such  spiritual  centre  of  unity. 
They  might  have  found  it  in  their  grandly  simple  creed, 
in  their  faith  in  God.  But  their  absorption  in  sacrificial 
ritual  and  its  adjuncts  shows  that  they  were  too  much 
under  the  influence  of  religious  externahsm.  This 
being  the  case,  they  could  only  preserve  the  purity  of 
their  communion  by  carefully  guarding  its  gates.  It  is 
pitiable  to  see  that  they  could  find  no  better  means  of 
doing  this  than  the  harsh  test  of  racial  integrit3\  Their 
action  in  this  matter  fostered  a  pride  of  birth  which  was 
as  injurious  to  their  own  better  Hves  as  it  was  to  the 
extension  of  their  religion  in  the  world.  But  so  long  as 
they  were  incapable  of  a  larger  method,  if  they  had 
accepted  counsels  of  liberalism  they  would  have  lost 
themselves  and  their  mission.  Looking  at  the  positive 
side  of  their  mission,  we  see  how  the  Jevv's  were  called 
to  bear  witness  to  the  great  principle  of  separateness. 
This  principle  is  as  essential  to  Christianity  as  it  was 
to  Judaism.  The  only  difference  is  that  with  the  more 
spiritual   faith   it    takes  a    more    spiritual    form.     The 


Ezra  iv.  1-5,  24.]    THE  LIMITS    OF  COMPREHENSION.        71 

people  of  God  must  ever  be  consecrated  to  God,  and 
therefore  separate  from  sin,  separate  fioni  the  world — 
separate  unto  God. 

NoTK. — For  the  section  iv.  6-23  see  Chapter  XIV.  This  section  is 
marked  by  a  change  of  language  ;  the  writer  adopts  Aramaic  at  iv.  8, 
and  he  continues  in  that  language  down  to  vi.  18.  The  decree  of 
Artaxerxes  in  vii,  12-26  is  also  in  Aramaic. 


CHAPTER   VII. 

THE  MISSION  OF  PROPHECY. 
Ezra  v.  i,  2. 

THE  work  of  building  the  temple  at  Jerusalem, 
which  had  been  but  nominally  commenced  in 
the  reign  of  Cyrus,  when  it  was  suddenly  arrested 
before  the  death  of  that  king,  and  which  had  not  been 
touched  throughout  the  reigns  of  the  two  succeeding 
kings,  Cambyses  and  Pseudo-Bardes,  was  taken  up 
in  earnest  in  the  second  year  of  Darius,  the  son  of 
Hystaspes  (b.c.  521).  The  disorders  of  the  empire 
were  then  favourable  to  local  libert3\  Cambyses 
committed  suicide  during  a  revolt  of  his  arm}^  on  the 
march  to  meet  the  Pretender  who  had  assumed  the 
name  of  his  murdered  brother,  Bardes.  Seven  months 
later  the  usurper  was  assassinated  in  his  palace  by 
some  of  the  Persian  nobles.  Darius,  who  v/as  one  of 
the  conspirators,  ascended  the  throne  in  the  midst  of 
confusion  and  while  the  empire  seemed  to  be  faUing 
to  pieces.  Elam,  the  old  home  of  the  house  of  Cyrus, 
revolted  ;  Syria  revolted  ;  Babylon  revolted  twice,  and 
was  twice  taken  by  siege.  For  a  time  the  king's  writ 
could  not  run  in  Palestine.  But  it  was  not  on  account 
of  these  poHtical  changes  that  the  Jews  returned  to 
their  work.  The  relaxing  of  the  supreme  authority 
had  left  them   more  than   ever  at   the  mercy  of  their 


Ezra  V.  i,  2.]      THE  MISSION  OF  PROPHECY.  73 


unfriendly  neighbours.  The  generous  disposition  of 
Darius  might  have  led  them  to  regard  him  as  a 
second  Cyrus,  and  his  religion  might  have  encour- 
aged them  to  hope  that  he  would  be  favourable  to 
them,  for  Darius  was  a  monotheist,  a  worshipper 
of  Ormazd.  But  they  recommenced  their  work  with- 
out making  any  appeal  to  the  Great  King  and  without 
receiving  any  permission  from  him,  and  they  did  this 
when  he  was  far  too  busy  fighting  for  his  throne  to 
attend  to  the  troubles  of  a  small,  distant  city. 

We  must  look  in  another  direction  for  the  impetus 
which  started  the  Jews  again  upon  their  work.  Here 
we  come  upon  one  of  the  most  striking  facts  in  the 
history  of  Israel,  nay,  one  of  the  greatest  phenomena  in 
the  spiritual  experience  of  mankind.  The  voice  of 
prophecy  was  heard  among  the  ruins  of  Jerusalem. 
The  Cassandra-like  notes  of  Jeremiah  had  died  away 
more  than  half  a  century  before.  Then  Ezekiel  had 
seen  his  fantastic  visions,  ''  a  captive  by  the  river  of 
Chebar,"  and  the  Second  Isaiah  had  sounded  his 
trumpet-blast  in  the  East  summoning  the  exiles  to  a 
great  hope  ;  but  as  yet  no  prophet  had  appeared  among 
the  pilgrims  on  their  return  to  Jerusalem.  We  cannot 
account  for  the  sudden  outburst  of  prophecy.  It  is  a 
work  of  the  Spirit  that  breathes  like  the  wind,  coming 
we  know  not  how.  We  can  hear  its  sound ;  we  can 
perceive  the  fact.  But  we  cannot  trace  its  origin,  or 
determine  its  issues.  It  is  born  in  mystery  and  it 
passes  into  mystery.  If  it  is  true  that  ^^ pocta  nascitur^ 
non  fity'  much  more  must  we  affirm  that  the  prophet  is 
no  creature  of  human  culture.  He  may  be  cultivated, 
after  God  has  made  him  ;  he  cannot  be  manufactured 
by  any  human  machiner3\  No  "  School  of  the 
Prophets"  ever    made  a  true  prophet.       Many  of  the 


74  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

prophets  never  came  near  any  such  institution  ;  some 
of  them  distinctly  repudiated  the  professional  "  order." 
The  lower  prophets  with  which  the  Northern  King- 
dom once  swarmed  were  just  dervishes  who  sang  and 
danced  and  worked  themselves  into  a  frenzy  before  the 
altars  on  the  high  places  ;  these  men  were  quite  different 
from  the  truly  inspired  messengers  of  God.  Their  craft 
could  be  taught,  and  their  sacred  colleges  recruited  to 
any  extent  from  the  ranks  of  fanaticism.  But  the  rare, 
austere  souls  that  spoke  with  the  authority  of  the  Most 
High  came  in  a  totally  different  manner.  When  there 
was  no  prophet  and  when  visions  were  rare  men  could 
only  wait  for  God  to  send  the  hoped-for  guide  ;  they 
could  not  call  him  into  existence.  The  appearance  of 
an  inspired  soul  is  always  one  of  the  marvels  of  history. 
Great  men  of  the  second  rank  may  be  the  creatures  of 
their  age.  But  it  is  given  to  the  few  of  the  very  first 
order  to  be  independent  of  their  age,  to  confront  it  and 
oppose  it  if  need  be,  perhaps  to  turn  its  current  and 
shape  its  course. 

The  two  prophets  who  now  proclaimed  their  message 
in  Jerusalem  appeared  at  a  time  of  deep  depression. 
They  were  not  borne  on  the  crest  of  a  wave  of  a  re- 
ligious revival,  as  its  spokesmen  to  give  it  utterance. 
Pagan  orators  and  artists  flourished  in  an  Augustan  age. 
The  Hebrew  prophets  came  when  the  circumstances  of 
society  were  least  favourable.  Like  painters  arising  to 
adorn  a  dingy  city,  like  poets  singing  of  summer  in  the 
winter  of  discontent,  like  flowers  in  the  wilderness,  like 
wells  in  the  desert,  they  brought  life  and  strength  and 
gladness  to  the  helpless  and  despondent,  because  they 
came  from  God.  The  literary  form  of  their  work 
reflected  the  civilisation  of  their  day,  but  there  was  on 
it  a  light  that  never  shone  on  sea  or  shore,  and  this  they 


Ezra  V.  i,  2.]      THE  MISSION  OF  PROPHECY.  75 

knew  to  be  the  light  of  God.  We  never  find  a  true 
religious  revival  springing  from  the  spirit  of  the  age. 
Such  a  revival  always  begins  in  one  or  two  choice  souls 
— in  a  Moses,  a  Samuel,  a  John  the  Baptist,  a  St.  Bernard, 
a  Jonathan-Edwards,  a  Wesley,  a  Newman.  Therefore 
it  is  vain  for  weary  watchers  to  scan  the  horizon  for 
signs  of  the  times  in  the  hope  that  some  general 
improvement  of  society  or  some  widespread  awakening 
of  the  Church  will  usher  in  a  better  future.  This  is  no 
reason  for  discouragement,  however.  It  rather  warns 
us  not  to  despise  the  day  of  small  things.  When  once 
the  spring  of  living  v/ater  breaks  out,  though  it  flows  at 
first  in  a  little  brook,  there  is  hope  that  it  may  swell 
into  a  great  river. 

The  situation  is  the  more  remarkable  since  the  first 
of  the  two  prophets  was  an  old  man,  who  even  seems 
to  have  known  the  first  temple  before  its  destruction 
by  Nebuchadnezzar.*  Haggai  is  called  simply  "  the 
prophet,"  perhaps  because  his  father's  name  was  not 
known,  but  more  likely  because  he  himself  had  attained 
so  much  eminence  that  the  title  was  given  to  him 
par  excellence.  Still  this  may  only  apply  to  the  des- 
criptions of  him  in  the  age  of  the  chronicler.  There  is 
no  indication  that  he  prophesied  in  his  earlier  days. 
He  was  probably  one  of  the  captives  who  had  been 
carried  av/ay  to  Babylon  in  his  childhood,  and  who  had 
returned  v/ith  Zerubbabel  to  Jerusalem.  Yet  all  this 
time  and  during  the  first  years  of  his  return,  as  far  as 
we  know,  he  was  silent.  At  length,  in  extreme  old 
age,  he  burst  out  into  inspired  utterance — one  of  Joel's 
old  men  who  were  to  dream  dreams,!  like  John  the 
Evangelist,  whose  greatest    work   dates   from   his  last 

*  Hag.  i.  I,  ii.  9.  f  Joel  ii.  28. 


76  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

years,  and  Milton,  who  wrote  his  great  epic  when 
affliction  seemed  to  have  ended  his  life-work.  He  must 
have  been  brooding  over  the  bitter  disappointment  in 
which  the  enthusiasm  of  the  returned  captives  had  been 
quenched.  It  could  not  be  God's  will  that  they  should 
be  thus  mocked  and  deceived  in  their  best  hopes.  True 
faith  is  not  a  will-o'-the-wisp  that  lands  its  followers  in 
a  dreary  swamp.  The  hope  of  Israel  is  no  mirage. 
For  God  is  faithful.  Therefore  the  despair  of  the 
Jews  must  be  wrong. 

We  have  a  few  fragments  of  the  utterances  of  Haggai 
preserved  for  us  in  the  Old  Testament  Canon.  They 
are  so  brief  and  bald  and  abrupt  as  to  suggest  the 
opinion  that  they  are  but  notes  of  his  discourses,  mere 
outlines  of  what  he  really  said.  As  they  are  preserved 
for  us  they  certainly  convey  no  idea  of  wealth  of  poetic 
imagination  or  richness  of  oratorical  colouring.  But 
Haggai  may  have  possessed  none  of  these  quahties,  and 
yet  his  words  may  have  had  a  peculiar  force  of  their 
own.  He  is  a  reflective  man.  The  long  meditation 
of  years  has  taught  him  the  value  of  thoughtfulness. 
The  burden  of  his  message  is  ''  Consider  your  ways."  * 
In  short,  incisive  utterances  he  arrests  attention  and 
urges  consideration.  But  the  outcome  of  all  he  has  to 
say  is  to  cheer  the  drooping  spirits  of  his  fellow-citizens, 
and  urge  on  the  rebuilding  of  the  temple  with  confident 
promises  of  its  great  future.  For  the  most  part  his 
inspiration  is  simple,  but  it  is  searching,  and  we  perceive 
the  triumphant  hopefulness  of  the  true  prophet  in  the 
promise  that  the  latter  glory  of  the  house  of  God  shall 
be  greater  than  the  former,  f 

Haggai  began  to  prophesy  on  the  first  day  of  the 

*  Hag.  i.  5,  7.  •\  Hag.  ii.  9. 


Ezrav.  1,2.]      THE  MISSION  OF  PROPHECY.  77 


sixth  month  of  the  second  year  of  Darius.*  So  effective 
were  his  words  that  Zerubbabel  and  his  companions 
were  at  once, roused  from  the  lethargy  of  despair,  and 
within  three  weeks  the  masons  and  carpenters  were 
again  at  work  on  the  temple.t  Two  months  after 
Haggai  had  broken  the  long  silence  of  prophecy  in 
Jerusalem  Zechariah  appeared.  He  was  of  a  very 
different  stamp ;  he  was  one  of  the  young  men  who 
see  visions.  Familiar  with  the  imagery  of  Babylonian 
art,  he  wove  its  symbols  into  the  pictures  of  his  own 
exuberant  fancy.  Moreover,  Zechariah  was  a  priest. 
Thus,  like  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,  he  united  the  two 
rival  tendencies  which  had  confronted  one  another  in 
marked  antagonism  during  the  earlier  periods  of  the 
history  of  Israel.  Henceforth  the  brief  return  of 
prophetism,  its  soft  after-glow  among  the  restored 
people,  is  in  peaceable  alliance  with  priestism.  The 
last  prophet,  Malachi,  even  exhorts  the  Jews  to  pay 
the  priests  their  dues  of  tithe.  Zechariah,  Hke  Haggai, 
urges  on  the  work  of  building  the  temple. 

Thus  the  chronicler's  brief  note  on  the  appearance  of 
two  prophets  at  Jerusalem,  and  the  electrical  effect  of 
their  message,  is  a  striking  illustration  of  the  mission 
of  prophecy.  That  mission  has  been  strangely  mis- 
apprehended by  succeeding  ages.  Prophets  have  been 
treated  as  miraculous  conjurers,  whose  principal  busi- 
ness consisted  in  putting  together  elaborate  puzzles, 
perfectly  unintelligible  to  their  contemporaries,  which 
the  curious  of  later  times  were  to  decipher  by  the  light 
of  events.  The  prophets  themselves  formed  no  such 
idle  estimate  of  their  work,  nor  did  their  contemporaries 
assign  to  them  this  quaint  and  useless  role.     Though 

*  Hag.  i.  I.  t  Hag.  ii.  i  seq. 


78        EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

these  men  were  not  the  creatures  of  their  times,  they 
Hved  for  their  times.  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  as  the 
chronicler  emphatically  puts  it,  "prophesied  to  the 
Jews  that  were  in  Jerusalem,  .  .  .  even  unto  ther.ir  The 
object  of  their  message  was  immediate  and  quite 
practical — to  stir  up  the  despondent  people  and  urge 
them  to  build  the  temple — and  it  was  successful  in 
accomphshing  that  end.  As  prophets  of  God  they 
necessarily  touched  on  eternal  truths.  They  w^ere  not 
mere  opportunists ;  their  strength  la}^  in  the  grasp  of 
fundamental  principles.  This  is  why  their  teaching 
still  lives,  and  is  of  lasting  use  for  the  Church  in  all 
ages.  But  in  order  to  understand  that  teaching  we 
must  first  of  all  read  it  in  its  original  historical  setting, 
and  discover  its  direct  bearing  on  contemporary  needs. 
Now  the  question  arises,  In  what  way  did  these 
prophets  of  God  help  the  temple-builders  ?  The  frag- 
ments of  their  utterances  which  we  possess  enable 
us  to  answer  this  question.  Zerubbabel  was  a  dis- 
appointing leader.  Such  a  m.an  was  far  below  the 
expected  Messiah,  although  high  hopes  may  have  been 
set  upon  him  when  he  started  at  the  head  of  the 
caravan  of  pilgrims  from  Babylon.  Cyrus  may  have 
known  him  better,  and  with  the  instinct  of  a  king  in 
reading  m.en  may  have  entrusted  the  lead  to  the  heir  of 
the  Jewish  throne,  because  he  saw^  there  would  be  no 
possibiHty  of  a  dangerous  rebellion  resulting  from  the 
act  of  confidence.  Haggai's  encouragement  to  Zerub- 
babel to  "  be  strong  "  is  in  a  tone  that  suggests  some 
weakness  on  the  part  of  the  Jewish  leader.  Both  the 
prophets  thought  that  he  and  his  people  were  too  easily 
discouraged.  It  was  a  part  of  the  prophetic  insight  to 
look  below  the  surface  and  discover  the  real  secret  of 
failure.     The  Jews  set  down   their  failure  to  adverse 


Ezrav.  I.  2.]      THE  MISSION  OF  PROPHECY.  79 


circumstances  ;  the  prophets  attributed  it  to  the  character 
and  conduct  of  the  people  and  their  leaders.  Weak 
men  commonl^^  excuse  their  inactivity  by  reciting  their 
difficulties,  when  stronger  men  would  only  regard 
those  difficulties  as  furnishing  an  occasion  for  extra 
exertion.  That  is  a  most  superficial  view  of  history 
which  regards  it  as  wholly  determined  by  circumstances. 
No  great  nation  ever  arose  on  such  a  principle.  The 
Greeks  who  perished  at  Thermopylae  within  a  few 
years  of  the  times  we  are  now  considering  are  honoured 
by  all  the  ages  as  heroes  of  patriotism  just  because 
they  refused  to  bow  to  circumstances.  Now  the  courage 
which  patriots  practised  in  pagan  lands  is  urged  upon 
the  Jews  by  their  prophets  from  higher  considerations. 
They  are  to  see  that  they  are  weak  and  cowardly  when 
they  sit  in  dumb  despair,  crushed  by  the  weight  of 
external  opposition.  They  have  made  a  mistake  in 
putting  their  trust  in  princes.*  They  have  relied  too 
much  on  Zerubbabel  and  too  httle  on  God.  The  failure 
of  the  arm  of  flesh  should  send  them  back  to  the  never- 
failing  out-stretched  arm  of  the  Almighty. 

Have  we  not  met  with  the  same  mistaken  discourage- 
ment and  the  same  deceptive  excuses  for  it  in  the  work 
of  the  Church,  in  missionary  enterprises,  in  personal 
lives  ?  Every  door  is  shut  against  the  servant  of  God 
but  one,  the  door  of  prayer.  Forgetting  this,  and  losing 
sight  of  the  ke}^  of  faith  that  would  urhlock  it,  he  sits, 
like  Elijah  by  Kerith,  the  picture  of  abject  wretched- 
ness. His  great  enterprises  are  abandoned  because  he 
thinks  the  opposition  to  them  is  insuperable.  He  for- 
gets that,  though  his  own  forces  are  small,  he  is  the 
envoy  of  the  King  of  kings,  who  will  not  suffer  him  to 


♦  Psalm  cxviii.  8,  9. 


8o  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

be  worsted  if  only  he  appeals  to  Heaven  for  fresh 
supplies.  A  dead  materialism  lies  like  a  leaden  weight 
on  the  heart  of  the  Church,  and  she  has  not  faith 
enough  to  shake  it  off  and  claim  her  great  inheritance 
in  all  the  spiritual  wealth  of  the  Unseen.  Many  a  man 
cries,  like  Jacob,  *^  All  these  things  are  against  me,"  not 
perceiving  that,  even  if  they  are,  no  number  of  "  things  " 
should  be  permitted  to  check  the  course  of  one  who 
looks  above  and  beyond  what  is  seen  and  therefore 
only  temporal  to  the  eternal  resources  of  God. 

This  was  the  message  of  Zechariah  to  Zerubbabel : 
"  Not  by  might,  nor  by  power,  but  by  My  spirit,  saith 
the  Lord  of  hosts.  Who  art  thou,  O  great  mountain  ? 
before  Zerubbabel  thou  shalt  becom^e  a  plain  :  and 
he  shall  bring  forth  the  head  stone  with  shoutings  of 
Grace,  grace  unto  it !  "  * 

Here,  then,  is  the  secret  of  the  sudden  revival  of 
activity  on  the  part  of  the  Jews  after  they  had  been 
sitting  for  years  in  dumb  apathy,  gazing  hopelessly  on 
the  few  stones  that  had  been  laid  among  the  ruins  of 
the  old  temple.  It  was  not  the  returning  favour  of  the 
court  under  Darius,  it  was  not  the  fame  of  the  house  of 
David,  it  was  not  the  priestly  dignity  of  the  family  of 
Zadok  that  awakened  the  slumbering  zeal  of  the  Jews ; 
the  movement  began  in  an  unofficial  source,  and  it 
passed  to  the  people  through  unofficial  channels.  It 
commenced  in  the  meditations  of  a  calm  thinker;  it 
was  furthered  by  the  visions  of  a  rapt  seer.  This  is  a 
clear  indication  of  the  fact  that  the  world  is  ruled  by 
mind  and  spirit,  not  merely  by  force  and  authority. 
Thought  and  imagination  lie  at  the  springs  of  action. 
In  the  heart  of  it  history  is  moulded  by  ideas.     "  Big 

*  Zech.  iv.  6,  7. 


Ezra  V.  I,  2.]      THE  MISSION  OF  PROPHECY.  8i 


battalions,"  ''the  sinews  of  war,"  "blood  and  iron,"  are 
phrases  that  suggest  only  the  most  external  and  there- 
fore the  most  superficial  causes.  Beneath  them  are  the 
ideas  that  govern  all  they  represent. 

Further,  the  influence  of  the  prophets  shows  that  the 
ideas  which  have  most  vitality  and  vigour  are  moral 
and  spiritual  in  character.  AW  thoughts  are  influential 
in  proportion  as  they  take  possession  of  the  minds  and 
hearts  of  men  and  women.  There  is  power  in  concep- 
tions of  science,  philosophy,  politics,  sociology.  But 
the  ideas  that  touch  people  to  the  quick,  the  ideas  that 
stir  the  hidden  depths  of  consciousness  and  rouse  the 
slumbering  energies  of  life,  are  those  that  make  straight 
for  the  conscience.  Thus  the  two  prophets  exposed  the 
shame  of  indolence  ;  they  rallied  their  gloomy  fellow- 
citizens  by  high  appeals  to  the  sense  of  right. 

Again,  this  influence  was  immensely  strengthened 
by  its  relation  to  God.  The  prophets  were  more  than 
moralists.  The  meditations  of  Marcus  Aurelius  could 
not  touch  any  people  as  the  considerations  of  the  calm 
Haggai  touched  the  Jews,  for  the  older  prophet,  as  well 
as  the  more  rousing  Zechariah,  found  the  spell  of  his 
message  in  its  revelation  of  God.  He  made  the  Jews 
perceive  that  they  were  not  deserted  by  Jehovah ;  and 
directly  they  felt  that  God  was  with  them  in  their  work 
the  weak  and  timid  citizens  were  able  to  quit  them  like 
men.  The  irresistible  might  of  Cromwell's  Ironsides 
at  Marston  Moor  came  from  their  unwavering  faith  in 
their  battle-cry,  "The  Lord  of  Hosts  is  with  us!" 
General  Gordon's  immeasurable  courage  is  explained 
when  we  read  his  letters  and  diaries,  and  see  how  he 
regarded  himself  as  simply  an  instrument  through 
whom  God  wrought.  Here,  too,  is  the  strong  side  of 
Calvinism. 

6 


82  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


Then  this  impression  of  the  power  and  presence  of 
God  in  their  destinies  was  deepened  in  the  Jews  by 
the  manifest  Divine  authority  with  which  the  prophets 
spake.  They  prophesied  "  in  the  name  of  the  God  of 
Israel  "^ — the  one  God  of  the  people  of  both  kingdoms 
now  united  in  their  representatives.  Their  "  Thus  saith 
the  Lord  "  was  the  powder  that  drove  the  shot  of  their 
message  through  the  toughest  hide  of  apathy.  Except 
to  a  Platonist,  ideas  are  impossible  apart  from  the  mind 
that  thinks  them.  Nov/  the  Jews,  as  w^ell  as  their 
prophets,  felt  that  the  great  ideas  of  prophecy  could 
not  be  the  products  of  pure  human  thinking.  The 
sublime  character,  the  moral  force,  the  superb  hope- 
fulness of  these  ideas  proclaimed  their  Divine  origin. 
As  it  is  the  mission  of  the  prophet  to  speak  for  God,  so 
it  is  the  voice  of  God  in  His  inspired  messenger  that 
awakes  the  dead  and  gives  strength  to  the  weak. 

This  ultimate  source  of  prophecy  accounts  for  its 
unique  character  of  hopefulness,  and  that  in  turn  makes 
it  a  pov/erful  encouragement  for  the  weak  and  de- 
pressed people  to  whom  it  is  sent.  Wordsworth  tells 
us  that  we  live  by  "  admiration,  love,  and  hope."  If 
one  of  these  three  sources  of  vitality  is  lost,  life  itself 
shrinks  and  fades.  The  man  whose  hope  has  fled  has 
no  lustre  in  his  eye,  no  accent  in  his  voice,  no  elasticity 
in  his  tread  ;  by  his  dull  and  listless  attitude  he  de- 
clares that  the  life  has  gone  out  of  him.  But  the 
ultimate  end  of  prophecy  is  to  lead  up  to  a  gospel, 
and  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  gospel "  is  just  that 
there  is  a  message  from  God  bringing  hope  to  the 
despairing.  By  inspiring  a  new  hope  this  message 
kindles   a   new  life. 


CHAPTER   VIII. 

NEW  DIFFICULTIES  MET  IN  A   NEW  SPIRIT. 
Ezra  v.  3 — vi.  5. 

IT  is  in  keeping  with  the  character  of  his  story  of 
the  returned  Jews  throughout,  that  no  sooner  has 
the  chronicler  let  a  ray  of  sunshine  fall  on  his  page — 
in  his  brief  notice  of  the  inspiriting  mission  of  the  two 
prophets — than  he  is  compelled  to  plunge  his  narrative 
again  into  gloom.  But  he  shows  that  there  was  now 
a  new  spirit  in  the  Jews,  so  that  they  were  prepared 
to  meet  opposition  in  a  more  manly  fashion.  If  their 
jealous  neighbours  had  been  able  to  paralyse  their 
efforts  for  years,  it  was  only  to  be  expected  that  a 
revival  of  energy  in  Jerusalem  should  provoke  an 
increase  of  antagonism  abroad,  and  doubtless  the  Jews 
v/ere  prepared  for  this.  Still  it  was  not  a  little 
alarming  to  learn  that  the  infection  of  the  anti- 
Jewish  temper  had  spread  over  a  wide  area.  The 
original  opposition  had  come  from  the  Samaritans. 
But  in  this  later  time  the  Jews*  were  questioned  by 
the  Satrap  of  the  whole  district  east  of  the  Euphrates 
— "  the  governor  beyond  the  river,"  *  as  the  chronicler 
^styles  him,  describing  his  terrkory  as  it  would  be 
regarded   officially    from    the   standpoint   of    Babylon. 


*  Ezra  V.  3. 

83 


84  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

His  Aramaic  name,  Tattenai,  shows  that  he  was  not 
a  Persian,  but  a  native  Syrian,  appointed  to  his  own 
province,  according  to  the  Persian  custom.  This  man 
and  one  Shethar-bozenai,  whom  we  may  assume  to  be  his 
secretary,  must  have  been  approached  by  the  colonists 
in  such  a  way  that  their  suspicions  were  roused. 
Their  action  was  at  first  only  just  and  reasonable. 
They  asked  the  Jews  to  state  on  what  authority  they 
were  rebuilding  the  temple  with  its  massive  walls.  In 
the  Hebrew  Bible  the  answer  of  the  Jews  is  so 
peculiar  as  to  suggest  a  corruption  of  the  text.  It 
is  in  the  first  person  plural — '*  Then  said  we  unto 
them,"^etc.*  In  the  Septuagint  the  third  person  is 
substituted — *'  Then  said  they"  etc.,  and  this  render- 
ing is  followed  in  the  Syriac  and  Arabic  versions.  It 
would  require  a  very  slight  alteration  in  the  Hebrew 
text.  The  Old  Testament  Revisers  have  retained  the 
first  person — setting  the  alternative  reading  in  the 
margin.  If  we  keep  to  the  Hebrew  text  as  it  stands, 
we  must  conclude  that  we  have  here  a  fragment  from 
some  contemporary  writer  which  the  chronicler  has 
transcribed  literally.  But  then  it  seems  confusing. 
Some  have  shaped  the  sentence  into  a  direct  statement, 
so  that  in  reply  to  the  inquiry  for  their  authority  the 
Jews  give  the  names  of  the  builders.  How  is  this  an 
answer  ?  Possibly  the  name  of  Zerubbabel,  who  had 
been  appointed  governor  of  Jerusalem  by  Cyrus,  could 
be  quoted  as  an  authority.  And  yet  the  weakness  of 
his  position  was  so  evident  that  very  little  would  be 
gained  in  this  way,  for  it  would  be  the  right  of  the 
Satrap  to  inquire  into  the  conduct  of  the  local  governor. 
If,  however,  we  read  the  sentence  in  the  third  person, 

*  Ezra  V.  4. 


Ezra  V.  3— vi.  5.]   DIFFICULTIES  MET  IN  NEW  SPIRIT. 


it  will  contain  a  further  question  from  the  Satrap  and 

his  secretary,  inquiring  for  the  names  of  the  leaders  in 
the  work  at  Jerusalem.  Such  an  inquiry  threatened 
danger  to  the  feeble  Zerubbabel. 

The  seriousness  of  the  situation  is  recognised  by  the 
grateful  comment  of  the  chronicler,  who  here  remarks 
that  "  the  eye  of  their  God  was  upon  the  elders  of  the 
Jews."  *  It  is  the  peculiarity  of  even  the  dryest 
records  of  Scripture  that  the  writers  are  always  ready 
to  detect  the  presence  of  God  in  history.  This  justifies 
us  in  describing  the  Biblical  narratives  as  "sacred 
history,"  in  contrast  to  the  so-called  "  secular  history  " 
of  such  authors  as  Herodotus  and  Livy.  The  narrow 
conception  of  the  difference  is  to  think  that  God  was 
with  the  Jews,  while  He  left  the  Greeks  and  Romans 
and  the  whole  Gentile  world  to  their  fate  without  any 
recognition  or  interference  on  His  part.  Such  a  view 
is  most  dishonouring  to  God,  who  is  thus  regarded  as 
no  better  than  a  tribal  divinity,  and  not  as  the  Lord  of 
heaven  and  earth.  It  is  directly  contradicted  by  the 
Old  Testament  historians,  for  they  repeatedly  refer  to 
the  influence  of  God  on  great  world  monarchies.  No 
doubt  a  claim  to  the  Divine  graciousness  as  the  peculiar 
privilege  of  Israel  is  to  be  seen  in  the  Old  Testament. 
As  far  as  this  was  perverted  into  a  selfish  desire  to 
confine  the  blessings  of  God  to  the  Jews,  it  was 
vigorously  rebuked  in  the  Book  of  Jonah.  Still  it  is 
indisputable  that  those  who  truly  sought  God's  grace, 
acknowledged  His  authority,  and  obeyed  His  will,  must 
have  enjoyed  privileges  which  such  of  the  heathen  as 
St.  Paul  describes  in  the  first  chapter  of  his  Epistle  to 
the    Romans   could   not   share.     Thus   the    chronicler 

*  Ezra  V.  5. 


86        EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

writes  as  though  the  leaders  of  the  Jews  in  their 
difficulties  were  the  special  objects  of  the  Divine  notice. 
The  eye  of  God  was  on  them,  distinctively.  God  is 
spoken  of  as  their  God.  They  were  men  who  knew, 
trusted,  and  honoured  God,  and  at  the  present  moment 
they  were  loyally  carrying  out  the  direction  of  God's 
prophets.  All  this  is  special.  Nevertheless,  it  remains 
true  that  the  chief  characteristic  of  Biblical  history  is 
its  recognition  of  the  presence  of  God  in  the  affairs 
of  mankind  generally,  and  this  applies  to  all  nations, 
although  it  is  most  marked  among  those  nations  in 
which  God  is  known  and  obeyed. 

The  peculiar  form  of  Providence  which  is  brought 
before  us  in  the  present  instance  is  the  Divine  observa- 
tion. It  is  difficult  to  believe  that,  just  as  the  earth  is 
visible  to  the  stars  throughout  the  day  while  the  stars 
are  invisible  to  the  earth,  we  are  always  seen  by  God 
although  we  never  see  Him.  When  circumstances  are 
adverse — and  these  circumstances  are  only  too  visible 
— it  is  hard  not  to  doubt  that  God  is  still  watching  all 
that  happens  to  us,  because  although  we  cry  out  in  our 
agony  no  answer  breaks  the  awful  silence  and  no  hand 
comes  out  of  the  clouds  to  hold  us  up.  It  seems  as 
though  our  words  were  lost  in  the  void.  But  that 
is  only  the  impression  of  the  moment.  If  we  read 
history  with  the  large  vision  of  the  Hebrew  chronicler, 
can  we  fail  to  perceive  that  this  is  not  a  God-deserted 
world  ?  In  the  details  His  presence  may  not  be 
discerned,  but  when  we  stand  back  from  the  canvas 
and  survey  the  whole  picture,  it  flashes  upon  us  like  a 
sunbeam  spread  over  the  whole  landscape,  Man}^  a 
man  can  recognise  the  same  happy  truth  in  the  course 
of  his  own  life  as  he  looks  back  over  a  wide  stretch 
of  i-t,  although  while  he  was  passing  through  his  per- 


Ezra  V.  3— vi.  5.]   DIFFICULTIES  MET  IN  NFJV  SPIRIT.       87 


plexing  experience  the  thicket  of  difficulties  intercepted 
his  vision  of  the  heavenly  light. 

Now  it  is  a  most  painful  result  of  unbelief  and 
cowardice  working  on  the  consciousness  of  guilt  lurking 
in  the  breast  of  every  sinful  man,  that  the  "eye  of 
God  "  has  become  an  object  of  terror  to  the  imagination 
of  so  many  people.  Poor  Hagar's  exclamation  of  joy 
and  gratitude  has  been  sadly  misapprehended.  Dis- 
covering to  her  amazement  that  she  is  not  alone  in  the 
wilderness,  the  friendless,  heart-broken  slave-girl  looks 
up  through  her  tears  with  a  smile  of  sudden  joy  on  her 
face,  and  exclaims,  "  Thou  God  seest  me  !  "  *  And  yet 
her  happy  words  have  been  held  over  terrified  children 
as  a  menace  !  That  is  a  false  thought  of  God  which 
makes  any  of  His  children  shrink  from  His  presence, 
except  they  are  foul  and  leprous  with  sin,  and  even 
then  their  only  refuge  is,  as  St.  Augustine  found,  to 
come  to  the  very  God  against  whom  they  have  sinned. 
We  need  not  fear  lest  some  day  God  may  make  a 
miserable  discovery  about  us.  He  knows  the  worst, 
already.  Then  it  is  a  ground  of  hope  that  while  He 
sees  all  the  evil  in  us  God  still  loves  His  children — 
that  He  does  not  love  us,  as  it  were,  under  a  misap- 
prehension. Our  Lord's  teaching  on  the  subject  of 
the  Divine  observation  is  wholly  reassuring.  Not 
a  sparrow  fails  to  the  ground  without  our  Father's 
notice,  the  very  hairs  of  our  head  are  all  numbered, 
and  the  exhortation  based  on  these  facts  is  not 
"  Beware  of  the  all-seeing  Eye  ! "  but  *'  Fear  not."  t 

The  limitation  of  the  chronicler's  remark  is  signi- 
ficant. He  speaks  of  the  eye  of  God,  not  of  God's 
mighty  hand,  nor  of  Hi^  outstretched  arm.     It  was  not 


*  Gen.  xvi.  13.  f  Luke  xii.  7. 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


yet  the  time  for  action  ;  but  God  was  watching  the 
course  of  events.  Or  if  God  was  acting,  His  procedure 
was  so  secret  that  no  one  could  perceive  it.  Mean- 
while it  was  enough  to  know  that  God  was  observing 
everything  that  was  transpiring.  He  could  not  be 
thought  of  as  an  Epicurean  divinity,  surveying  the 
agony  and  tragedy  of  human  life  with  a  stony  gaze  of 
supercilious  indifference,  as  the  proud  patrician  looks 
down  on  the  misery  of  the  dim  multitude.  For  God 
to  see  is  for  God  to  care ;  and  for  God  to  care  is  for 
God  to  help.  But  this  simple  statement  of  the  Divine 
observation  maintains  a  reserve  as  to  the  method  of  the 
action  of  God,  and  it  is  perhaps  the  best  way  of  de- 
scribing Providence  so  that  it  shall  not  appear  to  come 
into  colHsion  with  the  free  will  of  man. 

The  chronicler  distinctly  associates  the  Divine  obser- 
vation with  the  continuance  of  the  Jews  in  their  work. 
Because  the  eye  of  God  was  on  them  their  enemies 
could  not  cause  them  to  cease  until  the  matter  had 
been  referred  to  Darius  and  his  answer  received.  This 
may  be  explained  by  some  unrecorded  juncture  of  cir- 
cumstances which  arrested  the  action  of  the  enemies 
of  Israel ;  by  the  overruling  Providence  according  to 
which  the  Satrap  was  led  to  perceive  that  it  would  not 
be  wise  or  just  for  him  to  act  until  he  had  orders  from 
the  king ;  or  by  the  new  zeal  with  which  the  two 
prophets  had  inspired  the  Jews,  so  that  they  took  up  a 
bold  position  in  the  calm  confidence  that  God  was  with 
them.  Account  for  it  as  we  may,  we  see  that  in  the 
present  case  the  Jews  were  not  hindered  in  their  work. 
It  is  enough  for  faith  to  perceive  the  result  of  the 
Divine  care  without  discovering  the  process. 

The  letter  of  the  Satrap  and  his  secretary  embodies 
the  reply  of  the  Jev/s  to  the  official  inquiries,  and  that 


Ezra  V.  3— vi.  5.]   DIFFICULTIES  MET  IN  NEW  SPIIUT.      89 


reply  clearly  and  boldly  sets  forth  their  position.     One 
or  two  points  in  it  call  for  passing  notice. 

In  the  first  place,  the  Jews  describe  themselves  as 
"  servants  of  the  God  of  heaven  and  earth."  Thus 
they  start  by  mentioning  their  religious  status,  and  not 
any  facts  about  their  race  or  nation.  This  was  wise, 
and  calculated  to  disarm  suspicion  as  to  their  motives  ; 
and  it  was  strictly  true,  for  the  Jews  were  engaged  in  a 
distinctly  religious  work.  Then  the  way  in  which  they 
describe  their  God  is  significant.  They  do  not  use  the 
national  name  "  Jehovah."  That  would  serve  no  good 
purpose  with  men  who  did  not  know  or  acknowledge 
their  special  faith.  They  say  nothing  to  localise  and 
limit  their  idea  of  God.  To  build  the  temple  of  a  tribal 
god  would  be  to  further  the  ends  of  the  tribe,  and  this 
the  jealous  neighbours  of  the  Jews  supposed  they  were 
doing.  By  the  larger  title  the  Jews  lift  their  work  out 
of  all  connection  with  petty  personal  ends.  In  doing 
so  they  confess  their  true  faith.  These  Jews  of  the 
return  were  pure  monotheists.  They  believed  that 
there  was  one  God  who  ruled  over  heaven  and  earth. 

In  the  second  place,  with  just  a  touch  of  national 
pride,  pathetic  under  the  circumstances,  they  remind 
the  Persians  that  their  nation  has  seen  better  days,  and 
that  they  are  rebuilding  the  temple  which  a  great  king 
had  set  up.  Thus,  while  they  would  appeal  to  the 
generosity  of  the  authorities,  they  would  claim  their 
respect,  with  the  dignity  of  men  who  know  they  have 
a  great  history.  In  view  of  this  the  next  statement  is 
most  striking.  Reciting  the  piteous  story  of  the  over- 
throw of  their  nation,  the  destruction  of  their  temple, 
and  the  captivity  of  their  fathers,  the  Jews  ascribe  it  all 
to  their  national  sins.  The  prophets  had  long  ago 
discerned  the  connection  of  cause  and  effect  in  these 


90  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


matters.  But  while  it  was  only  the  subject  of  predic- 
tion, the  proud  people  indignantly  rejected  the  prophetic 
view.  Since  then  their  eyes  had  been  opened  by  the 
painful  purging  of  dire  national  calamities.  One  great 
proof  that  the  nation  had  profited  by  the  fiery  ordeal  of 
the  captivity  is  that  it  now  humbly  acknowledged  the 
sins  which  had  brought  it  into  the  furnace.  Trouble 
is  illuminating.  While  it  humbles  men,  it  opens  their 
eyes.  It  is  better  to  see  clearly  in  a  lowly  place  than 
to  walk  blindfold  on  perilous  heights. 

After  this  explanatory  pream.ble,  the  Jews  appeal  to 
the  edict  of  Cyrus,  and  describe  their  subsequent  con- 
duct as  a  direct  act  of  obedience  to  that  edict.  Thus 
they  plead  their  cause  as  loyal  subjects  of  the  Persian 
empire.  In  consequence  of  this  appeal,  the  Satrap  and 
his  secretary  request  the  king  to  order  a  search  to  be 
made  for  the  edict,  and  to  reply  according  to  his 
pleasure. 

The  chronicler  then  proceeds  to  relate  how  the  search 
was  prosecuted,  first  among  the  royal  archives  at 
Babylon — in  "the  house  of  books."*  One  of  Mr. 
Layard's  most  valuable  discoveries  was  that  of  a  set  of 
chambers  in  a  palace  at  Koyunjik,  the  whole  of  the  floor 
of  which  w^as  covered  more  than  a  foot  deep  with  terra- 
cotta tablets  inscribed  with  public  records. f  A  similar 
collection  has  been  recently  found  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  Babylon. f  In  some  such  record-house  the  search 
for  the  edict  of  Cyrus  was  made.  But  the  cylinder  or 
tablet  on  which  it  was  written  could  not  be  found.  The 
searchers  then  turned  their  attention  to  the  roll- 
chamber  at  the  winter  palace  of  Ecbatana,  and  there 


*  Ezra  vi.  i. 

f  "  Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  p.  345. 

:j:  Bertheau-Ryssel,  "  Kurzgefasstes  exegetisches  Handbuch,'  p.  74. 


Ezra  V.  3-vi.  5.]   DIFFICULTIES  MET  IN  NE]V  SPIRIT.       91 


a   parchment  or  papyrus  copy  of  the  edict  was  dis- 
covered. 

One  of  the  items  of  this  edict  as  it  is  now  given  is 
somewhat  surprising,  for  it  was  not  named  in  the  earher 
account  in  the  first  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Ezra.  This  is 
a  description  of  the  dimensions  of  the  temple  which  was 
to  be  built  at  Jerusalem.  It  must  have  been  not  a  little 
humiliating  to  the  Jews  to  have  to  take  these  measure- 
ments from  a  foreign  sovereign,  a  heathen,  a  polytheist. 
Possibly,  however,  they  had  been  first  supplied  to  the  king 
by  the  Jews,  so  that  the  builders  might  have  the  more 
explicit  permission  for  what  they  were  about  to  under- 
take. On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be  that  we  have  here 
the  outside  dimensions,  beyond  which  the  Jews  were 
not  permitted  to  go,  and  that  the  figures  represent  a 
limit  for  their  ambitions.  In  either  case  the  appearance 
of  the  details  in  the  decree  at  all  gives  us  a  vivid  con- 
ception of  the  thoroughness  of  the  Persian  autocracy, 
and  of  the  perfect  subjection  of  the  Jews  to  Cyrus. 

Some  difficulty  has  been  felt  in  interpreting  the 
figures  because  they  seem  to  point  to  a  larger  building 
than  Solomon's  temple.  The  height  is  given  at  sixty 
cubits,  and  the  breadth  at  the  same  measurement.  But 
Solomon's  temple  was  only  thirty  cubits  high,  and  its 
total  breadth,  with  its  side-chambers,  was  not  more 
than  forty  cubits.*  When  we  consider  the  comparative 
poverty  of  the  returned  Jews,  the  difficulties  under 
which  they  laboured,  the  disappointment  of  the  old 
men  who  had  seen  the  former  building,  and  the  short 
time  within  which  the  work  was  finished — only  four 
years  f — it  is  difficult  to  believe  that  it  was  more  than 
double  the  size  of  the  glorious  fabric  for  which  David 

*   1  Kings  vi,  2.  f  Ezra  iv.  24,  vi.  15. 


92  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

collected  materials,  on  which  Solomon  lavished  the  best 
resources  of  his  kingdom,  and  which  even  then  took 
many  more  years  in  building.  Perhaps  the  height  in- 
cludes the  terrace  on  which  the  temple  was  built,  and 
the  breadth  the  temple  adjuncts.  Perhaps  the  temple 
never  attained  the  dimensions  authorised  by  the  edict. 
But  even  if  the  full  size  were  reached,  the  building 
would  not  have  approached  the  size  of  the  stupendous 
temples  of  the  great  ancient  empires.  Apart  from  its 
courts  Solomon's  temple  was  certainly  a  small  building. 
It  was  not  the  size,  but  the  splendour  of  that  famous 
fabric  that  led  to  its  being  regarded  with  so  much 
admiration  and  pride. 

The  most  remarkable  architectural  feature  of  all  these 
ancient  temples  was  the  enormous  magnitude  of  the 
stones  with  which  they  were  built.  At  the  present  day 
the  visitor  to  Jerusalem  gazes  with  wonder  at  huge 
blocks,  all  carefully  chiselled  and  accurately  fitted  to- 
gether, v/here  parts  of  the  old  foundations  may  still 
be  discerned.  The  narrative  in  Ezra  makes  several 
references  to  the  great  stones — ''stones  of  rolling  "  * 
it  calls  them,  because  they  could  only  be  moved  on 
rollers.  Even  the  edict  mentions  ''  three  rows  of  great 
stones,"  together  with  "a  row  of  new  timber,"! — an 
obscure  phrase,  which  perhaps  means  that  the  walls 
were  to  be  of  the  thickness  of  three  stones,  vv^hile  the 
timber  formed  an  inner  pannelling  ;  or  that  there  were 
to  be  three  storeys  of  stone  and  one  of  wood  ;  or  yet 
another  possibility,  that  on  three  tiers  of  stone  a  tier  of 
wood  was  to  be  laid.  In  the  construction  of  the  inner 
court  of  Solomon's  temple  this  third  method  seems  to 
have  been  followed,  for  Vv^e  read,    *'And  he  built  the 

*  Ezra  V.  8.  f  Ezra  vi.  4. 


Ezra  V.  3-vi.  5.]   DIFFICULTIES  MET  IN  NEW  SPIRIT.      93 


inner  court  with  three  rows  of  hewn  stone  and  a  row  of 
cedar  beams."  ■'^  However  we  regard  it — and  the  plan 
is  confusing  and  a  matter  of  much  discussion — the 
impression  is  one  of  massive  strengtli.  The  jealous 
observers  noted  especially  the  building  of  '*  the  wall " 
of  the  temple.f  So  solid  a  piece  of  work  might  be 
turned  into  a  fortification.  But  no  such  end  seems  to 
have  been  contemplated  by  the  Jews.  They  built 
solidly  because  they  wished  their  work  to  stand.  It 
was  to  be  no  temporary  tabernacle  ;  but  a  permanent 
temple  designed  to  endure  to  posterity.  We  are  struck 
with  the  massive  character  of  the  Roman  remains  in 
Britain,  which  show  that  when  the  great  world  con- 
querors took  possession  of  our  island  they  settled  down 
in  it  and  regarded  it  as  a  permanent  property.  The 
same  grand  consciousness  of  permanence  must  have 
been  in  the  minds  of  the  brave  builders  who  planted 
this  solid  structure  at  Jerusalem  in  the  midst  of  troubles 
and  threatenings  of  disaster.  To-day,  when  we  look  at 
the  stupendous  Phoenician  and  Jewish  architecture  of 
Syria,  we  are  struck  with  admiration  at  the  patience, 
the  perseverance,  the  industry,  the  thoroughness,  the 
largeness  of  idea  that  characterised  the  work  of  these 
old-world  builders.  Surely  it  must  have  been  the 
outcome  of  a  similar  tone  and  temper  of  mind.  The 
modern  mind  may  be  more  nimble,  as  the  modern  work 
is  more  expeditious.  But  for  steadfastness  of  purpose 
the  races  that  wrought  so  patiently  at  great  enduring 
works  seem  to  have  excelled  anything  we  can  attain. 
And  yet  here  and  there  a  similar  characteristic  is 
observable — as,  for  example,  in  the  self-restraint  and 
continuous  toil  of  Charles  Darwin,  when  he  collected 


I  Kings  vi.  36.  f  Ezra  v.  9. 


94        EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


facts  for  twenty  years  before  he  published  the  book 
which  embodied  the  conclusion  he  had  drawn  from  his 
wide  induction.    ' 

The  solid  character  of  the  temple-building  is  further 
suggestive,  because  the  work  was  all  done  for  the  service 
of  God.  Such  work  should  never  be  hasty,  because  God 
has  the  leisure  of  eternity  in  which  to  inspect  it.  It  is 
labour  lost  to  make  it  superficial  and  showy  without  any 
real  strength,  because  God  sees  behind  all  pretences. 
Moreover,  the  fire  will  try  every  man's  work  of  what  sort 
it  is.  We  grow  im.patient  of  toil ;  we  weary  for  quick 
results  ;  v/e  forget  that  in  building  the  spiritual  temple 
strength  to  endure  the  shocks  of  temptation  and  to 
outlast  the  decay  of  time  is  more  valued  by  God  than 
the  gourd-like  display  which  is  the  sensation  of  the 
hour,  only  to  perish  as  quickly  as  it  has  sprung  up. 


T 


CHAPTER    IX. 

THE  DEDICATION  OE   THE   TEMPLE. 

Ezra  vi.  6-22. 

HE  chronicler's  version  of  the  edict  in  which  Darius 
repUes  to  the  appHcation  of  the  Satrap  Tattenai  is 
so  very  friendly  to  the  Jews  that  questions  have  been 
raised  as  to  its  genuineness.  We  cannot  but  perceive 
that  the  language  has  been  modified  in  its  transition 
from  the  Persian  terra-cotta  cylinder  to  the  roll  of  the 
Hebrew  chronicler,  because  the  Great  King  could  not 
have  spoken  of  the  religion  of  Israel  in  the  absolute 
phrases  recorded  in  the  Book  of  Ezra.  But  when  all 
allovv'ance  has  been  made  for  verbal  alterations  in  trans- 
lation and  transcription,  the  substance  of  the  edict  is 
still  sufficiently  remarkable.  Darius  fully  endorses 
the  decree  of  Cyrus,  and  even  exceeds  that  gracious 
ordinance  in  generosity.  He  curtly  bids  Tattenai  '*  let 
the  work  of  the  house  of  God  alone."  He  even  orders 
the  Satrap  to  provide  for  this  work  out  of  the  revenues 
of  his  district.  The  public  revenues  are  also  to  be  used 
in  maintaining  the  Jewish  priests  and  in  providing  them 
with  sacrifices — "  that  they  may  offer  sacrifices  of  sweet 
savour  unto  the  God  of  heaven,  and  pray  for  the  life  of 
the  king  and  of  his  sons."  * 

*  Ezra  vi.  10. 

95 


96  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  Darius 
sent  a  reply  that  was  favourable  to  the  Jews,  for  all 
opposition  to  their  work  w^as  stopped,  and  means  were 
found  for  completing  the  temple  and  maintaining  the 
costly  ritual.  The  Jews  gratefully  acknowledged  the 
influence  of  God  on  the  heart  of  Darius.  Surely  they 
were  right  in  doing  so.  They  were  gifted  with  the  true 
insight  of  faith.  It  is  no  contradiction  to  add  that — in 
the  earthly  sphere  and  among  the  human  motives 
through  which  God  works,  by  guiding  them — what  we 
know  of  Darius  will  account  to  some  extent  for  his 
friendliness  towards  the  Jews.  He  was  a  powerful 
ruler,  and  when  he  had  quelled  the  serious  rebellions 
that  had  broken  out  in  several  quarters  of  his  kingdom, 
he  organised  his  government  in  a  masterly  style  with 
a  new  and  thorough  system  of  satrapies,*  Then  he 
pushed  his  conquests  farther  afield,  and  subsequently 
came  into  contact  with  Europe,  although  ultimately  to 
suffer  a  humiliating  defeat  in  the  famous  battle  of 
Marathon.  In  fact,  we  may  regard  him  as  the  real 
founder  of  the  Persian  Empire.  Cyrus,  though  his 
family  was  of  Persian  origin,  was  originally  a  king  of 
Elam,  and  he  had  to  conquer  Persia  before  he  could 
rule  over  it ;  but  Darius  was  a  prince  of  the  Persian 
royal  house.  Unlike  Cyrus,  he  was  at  least  a  mono- 
theist,  if  not  a  thoroughgoing  Zoroastrian.  The 
inscription  on  his  tomb  at  Naksh-i-Riistem  attributes 
all  that  he  has  achieved  to  the  favour  of  Ormazd. 
"When  Ormazd  saw  this  earth  filled  with  revolt  and 
civil  w^ar,  then  did  he  entrust  it  to  me.  He  made  me 
king,  and  I  am  king.  By  the  grace  of  Ormazd  I  have 
restored  the  earth."    "All  that  I  have  done  I  have  done 

*  Herodotus,  iii.  89. 


Ezra  vi.  6-22.1    THE  DEDICATION  OF  THE   TEMPLE.         97 


through  the  grace  of  Ormazd.  Orinazd  brought  help 
to  me  until  I  had  completed  my  work.  May  Ormazd 
protect  from  evil  me  and  my  house  and  this  land. 
Therefore  I  pray  unto  Ormazd,  May  Ormazd  grant 
this  to  me."  "  O  Man  !  May  the  command  of  Ormazd 
not  be  despised  by  thee  :  leave  not  the  path  of  right, 
sin  not  ! "  *  Such  language  implies  a  high  religious 
conception  of  life.  Although  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose 
that  the  Jews  had  borrowed  anything  of  importance 
from  Zoroastrianism  during  the  captivity  or  in  the  time 
of  Cyrus — inasmuch  as  that  religion  was  then  scarcely 
known  in  Babylon — when  it  began  to  make  itself 
felt  there,  its  similarity  to  Judaism  could  not  fail  to 
strike  the  attention  of  observant  men.  It  taught  the 
existence  of  one  supreme  God — though  it  co-ordinated 
the  principles  of  good  and  evil  in  His  being,  as  two  sub- 
sidiary existences,  in  a  manner  not  allowed  by  Judaism — 
and  it  encouraged  prayer.  It  also  insisted  on  the  dread- 
ful evil  of  sin  and  urged  men  to  strive  after  purity,  with 
an  earnestness  that  witnessed  to  the  blending  of  morality 
with  religion  to  an  extent  unknown  elsewhere  except 
among  the  Jews.  Thus,  if  Darius  were  a  Zoroastrian, 
he  would  have  two  powerful  links  of  sympathy  with  the 
Jews  in  opposition  to  the  corrupt  idolatry  of  the  heathen 
— the  spiritual  monotheism  and  the  earnest  morality 
that  were  common  to  the  two  religions.  And  in  any 
case  it  is  not  altogether  surprising  to  learn  that  when 
he  read  the  letter  of  the  people  who  described  them- 
selves as  "  the  servants  of  the  God  of  heaven  and  earth," 
the  worshipper  of  Ormazd  should  have  sympathised 
with  them  rather  than  with  their  semi-pagan  opponents. 
Moreover,    Darius    must    have    known    something    of 

*  Sayce,  Introduction,  pp.  57,  58. 


98  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

Judaism  from  the  Jews  of  Babylon.  Then,  he  was 
restoring  the  temples  of  Ormazd  which  his  predecessor 
had  destroyed.  But  the  Jews  were  engaged  in  a  very 
similar  work ;  therefore  the  king,  in  his  antipathy  to  the 
idolaters,  would  give  no  sanction  to  a  heathenish  oppo- 
sition to  the  building  of  the  temple  at  Jerusalem  by  a 
people  who  believed  in  One  Spiritual  God. 

Darius  was  credited  with  a  generous  disposition, 
which  would  incline  him  to  a  kindly  treatment  of  his 
subjects.  Of  course  we  must  interpret  this  according 
to  the  manners  of  the  times.  For  example,  in  his  edict 
about  the  temple-building  he  gives  orders  that  any  one 
of  his  subjects  who  hinders  the  work  is  to  be  impaled 
on  a  beam  from  his  own  house,  the  site  of  which  is  to 
be  used  for  a  refuse  heap.*  Darius  also  invokes  the  God 
of  the  Jews  to  destroy  an}^  foreign  king  or  people  who 
should  attempt  to  alter  or  destroy  the  temple  at  Jeru- 
salem. The  savagery  of  his  menace  is  in  harmony  with 
his  conduct  w^hen,  according  to  Herodotus,  he  impaled 
three  thousand  men  at  Babylon  after  he  had  recaptured 
the  city.f  Those  were  cruel  times — Herodotus  tells  us 
that  the  besieged  Babylonians  had  previously  strangled 
their  own  wives  when  they  were  running  short  of 
provisions.^  The  imprecation  with  which  the  edict 
closes  may  be  m^atched  by  one  on  the  inscription  of 
Darius  at  Behistiuu,  where  the  Great  King  invokes  the 
curse  of  Ormazd  on  any  persons  v/ho  should  injure  the 
tablet.  The  ancient  despotic  world-rulers  had  no  con- 
ception of  the  modern  virtue  of  humanitarianism.  It 
is  sickening  to  picture  to  ourselves  their  methods  of 
government.     The  enormous  misery  involved  is  beyond 


Ezra  vi.  ii.  f  Herodotus,  iii.  159. 

X  Ibid. 


Ezra  %i.  6-22.]    THE  DEDICATION  OF  THE    TEMPLE.         99 

calculation.  Still  we  may  believe  that  the  worst  threats 
were  not  always  carried  out ;  we  may  make  some 
allowance  for  Oriental  extravagance  of  language.  And 
yet,  after  all  has  been  said,  the  conclusion  of  the  edict 
of  Darius  presents  to  us  a  kind  of  state  support  for 
religion  which  no  one  would  defend  in  the  present  day. 
In  accepting  the  help  of  the  Persian  sovereign  the  Jews 
could  not  altogether  dissociate  themselves  from  his 
way  of  government.  Nevertheless  it  is  fair  to  re- 
member that  they  had  not  asked  for  his  support.  They 
had  simply  desired  to  be  left  unmolested. 

Tattenai  loyally  executed  the  decree  of  Darius ;  the 
temple-building  proceeded  without  further  hindrance, 
and  the  work  was  completed  about  four  years  after 
its  recommencement  at  the  instigation  of  the  prophet 
Haggai.  Then  came  the  j03^ous  ceremony  of  the  dedi- 
cation. All  the  returned  exiles  took  part  in  it.  They 
are  named  collectively  ''  the  children  of  Israel " — 
another  indication  that  the  restored  Jews  were  regarded 
by  the  chronicler  as  the  representatives  of  the  whole 
united  nation  as  this  had  existed  under  David  and 
Solomon  before  the  great  schism.  Similarly  there  are 
twelve  he-goats  for  the  sin-offering — for  the  twelve 
tribes.*  Several  classes  of  Israelites  are  enumerated, — 
first  the  clergy  in  their  two  orders,  the  priests  and  the 
Levites,  always  kept  distinct  in  "  Ezra " ;  next  the 
laity,  who  are  described  as  "  the  children  of  the 
captivity."  The  limitation  of  this  phrase  is  significant. 
In  the  dedication  of  the  temple  the  Israelites  of  the 
land  who  were  mixed  up  with  the  heathen  people  are 
not  included.  Only  the  returned  exiles  had  built  the 
temple ;  only  they  were  associated  in  the  dedication  of 

*  Ezra  vi.  17. 


lOO  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

it.  Here  is  a  strictly  guarded  Church.  Access  to  it  is 
through  the  one  door  of  an  unimpeachable  genealogical 
record.  Happily  the  narrowness  of  this  arrangement 
is  soon  to  be  broken  through.  In  the  meanwhile  it  is 
to  be  observed  that  it  is  just  the  people  who  have 
endured  the  hardship  of  separation  from  their  beloved 
Jerusalem  to  whom  the  privilege  of  rejoicing  in  the 
completion  of  the  new  temple  is  given.  The  tame 
existence  that  cannot  fathom  the  depths  of  misery  is 
incapable  of  soaring  to  the  heights  of  bliss.  The  joy  of 
the  harvest  is  for  those  who  have  sown  in  tears. 

The  work  was  finished,  and  yet  its  very  completion 
was  a  new  commencement.  The  temple  was  now  dedi- 
cated— literally  ''initiated" — for  the  future  service  of 
God. 

This  dedication  is  an  instance  of  the  highest  use  of 
man's  work.  The  fruit  of  years  of  toil  and  sacrifice 
is  given  to  God.  Whatever  theories  we  may  have 
about  the  consecration  of  a  building — and  surely  every 
building  that  is  put  to  a  sacred  use  is  in  a  sense  a 
sacred  building — there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the 
rightness  of  dedication.  This  is  just  the  surrender  to 
God  of  what  was  built  for  Him  out  of  the  resources 
that  He  had  supplied.  A  dedication  service  is  a  solemn 
act  of  transfer  by  which  a  building  is  given  over  to  the 
use  of  God.  We  may  save  it  from  narrowness  if  we  do 
not  limit  it  to  places  of  public  assembly.  The  home 
where  the  family  altar  is  set  up,  where  day  by  day 
prayer  is  offered,  and  where  the  common  round  of 
domestic  duties  is  elevated  and  consecrated  by  being 
faithfully  discharged  as  in  the  sight  of  God,  is  a  true 
sanctuary  ;  it  too,  Hke  the  Jerusalem  temple,  has  its 
"  Holy  of  Holies."  Therefore  when  a  family  enters  a 
new  house,  or  when  two  young  lives  cross  the  threshold 


Ezra  vi.  6-22.]    THE  DEDICATION  OF  TtlE   TEMPLE. 


of  what  is  to  be  henceforth  their  '*  home,"  there  is  as 
true  a  ground  for  a  solemn  act  of  dedication  as  in 
the  opening  of  a  great  temple.  A  prophet  declared 
that  "  Holiness  to  the  Lord  "  was  to  characterise  the 
very  vessels  of  household  use  in  Jerusalem.*  It  may 
lift  some  of  the  burden  of  drudgery  which  presses  on 
people  who  are  compelled  to  spend  their  time  in  common 
house-toil,  for  them  to  perceive  that  they  may  become 
priests  and  priestesses  ministering  at  the  altar  even  in 
their  daily  work.  In  the  same  spirit  truly  devout  men 
of  business  will  dedicate  their  shops,  their  factories, 
their  offices,  the  tools  of  their  work,  and  the  enterprises 
in  which  they  engage,  so  that  all  may  be  regarded  as 
belonging  to  God,  and  only  to  be  used  as  His  will 
dictates.  Behind  every  such  act  of  dedication  there 
must  be  a  prior  act  of  self-consecration,  without  which 
the  gift  of  any  mere  thing  to  God  is  but  an  insult  to 
the  Father  who  only  seeks  the  hearts  of  His  children. 
Nay,  without  this  a  real  gift  of  any  kind  is  impossible. 
But  the  people  who  have  first  given  their  own  selves  to 
the  Lord  are  prepared  for  all  other  acts  of  surrender. 

According  to  the  custom  of  their  ritual,  the  Jews 
signalised  the  dedication  of  the  temple  b}^  the  offering 
of  sacrifices.  Even  with  the  help  of  the 'king's  bounty 
these  were  few  in  number  compared  with  the  lavish 
holocausts  that  were  offered  in  the  ceremony  of  dedi- 
cating Solomon's  temple.f  Here,  in  the  external  aspect 
of  things,  the  melancholy  archceulogists  might  have 
found  another  cause  for  lamentation.  But  we  are  not 
told  that  any  such  people  appeared  on  the  present  occa- 
sion. The  Jews  were  not  so  foolish  as  to  believe  that 
the  value  of  a  religious  movement  could  be  ascertained 


*  Zech.  xiv.  21.  f  i  Kings  viii.  63. 


102  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


by  the  study  of  architectural  dimensions.  Is  it 
less  misleading  to  attempt  to  estimate  the  spiritual 
prosperity  of  a  Church  by  casting  up  the  items  of  its 
balance-sheet,  or  tabulating  the  numbers  of  its  con- 
gregations ? 

Looking  more  closely  into  the  chronicler's  description 
of  the  sacrifices,  we  see  that  these  were  principally  of 
two  distinct  kinds.*  There  were  some  animals  for 
burnt-offerings,  w^hich  signified  complete  dedication, 
and  pledged  their  offerers  to  it.  Then  there  were 
other  animals  for  sin-offerings.  Thus  even  in  the 
joyous  dedication  of  the  temple  the  sin  of  Israel  could 
not  be  forgotten.  The  increasing  importance  of  sacri- 
fices for  sin  is  one  of  the  most  marked  features  of  the 
Hebrew  ritual  in  its  later  stages  of  development.  It 
shows  that  in  the  course  of  ages  the  national  conscious- 
ness of  sin  was  intensified.  At  the  same  time  it  makes 
it  clear  that  the  inexplicable  conviction  that  without 
shedding  of  blood  there  could  be  no  remission  of  sins 
was  also  deepened.  Whether  the  sacrifice  was  re- 
garded as  a  gift  pleasing  and  propitiating  an  offended 
God,  or  as  a  substitute  bearing  the  death-penalty  of 
sin,  or  as  a  sacred  life,  bestowing,  by  means  of  its 
blood,  new  life  on  sinners  who  had  forfeited  their  own 
lives ;  in  any  case,  and  however  it  was  interpreted,  it 
was  felt  that  blood  must  be  shed  if  the  sinner  was  to 
be  freed  from  guilt.  Throughout  the  ages  this  awful 
thought  was  more  and  more  vividty  presented,  and 
the  mystery  which  the  conscience  of  m.an}'-  refused  to 
abandon  continued,  until  there  was  a  great  revelation  of 
the  true  meaning  of  sacrifice  for  sin  in  the  one  efficacious 
atonement  of  Christ. 

*  Ezra  vi.  17. 


tzia  vi.  6-22. 1    THE  DEDICATION  OF  THE   TEMPLE.        \o-. 


A  subsidiary  point  to  be  noticed  here  is  that  there 
were  just  twelve  he-goats  sacrificed  for  the  twelve  tribes 
of  Israel.  These  were  national  sin-offerings,  and  not 
sacrifices  for  individual  sinners.  Under  special  cir- 
cumstances the  individual  could  bring  his  own  private 
offering.  But  in  this  great  temple  function  only  national 
sins  were  considered.  The  nation  had  suffered  as  a 
whole  for  its  collective  sin ;  in  a  corresponding  way  it 
had  its  collective  expiation  of  sin.  There  are  always 
national  sins  which  need  a  broad  public  treatment, 
apart  from  the  particular  acts  of  wickedness  committed 
by  separate  men. 

All  this  is  said  by  the  chronicler  to  have  taken  place 
in  accordance  with  The  Law — "  As  it  is  written  in  the 
book  of  Moses."  *  Here,  as  in  the  case  of  the  similar 
statement  of  the  chronicler  in  connection  with  the 
sacrifices  offered  when  the  great  altar  of  burnt-offerings 
was  set  up,t  we  must  remember,  in  the  first  place,  that 
we  have  to  do  with  the  reflections  of  an  author  writing 
in  a  subsequent  age,  to  whom  the  whole  Pentateuch 
was  a  familiar  book.  But  then  it  is  also  clear  that 
before  Ezra  had  startled  the  Jews  by  reading  The  Law 
in  its  later  revelation  there  must  have  been  some  earlier 
form  of  it,  not  only  in  Deuteronomy,  but  also  in  a  priestly 
collection  of  ordinances.  It  is  a  curious  fact  that  no 
full  directions  on  the  division  of  the  courses  of  the 
priests  and  Levites  is  now  to  be  found  in  the  Penta- 
teuch. On  this  occasion  the  services  must  have  been 
arranged  on  the  model  of  the  traditional  priestly  law. 
They  were  not  left  to  the  caprice  of  the  hour.  There 
was  order ;  there  was  continuity ;  there  was  obedience. 

The  chronicler  concludes  this  period  of  his  history 

*  Ezra  vi.  i8.  +  Ezra  iii.  2. 


104  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

by  adding  a  paragraph  *  on  the  first  observance  of  the 
Passover  among  the  returned  Jews.  The  national  re- 
ligion is  now  re-estabUshed,  and  therefore  the  greatest 
festival  of  the  year  can  be  enjoyed.  One  of  the 
characteristics  of  this  festival  is  made  especially  promi- 
nent in  the  present  observance  of  it.  The  significance 
of  the  unleavened  bread  is  pointedly  noticed.  All  leaven 
is  to  be  banished  from  the  houses  during  the  week 
of  the  Passover.  All  impurity  must  also  be  banished 
from  the  people.  The  priests  and  Levites  perform  the 
ceremonial  purifications  and  get  themselves  legally 
clean.  The  franchise  is  enlarged  ;  and  the  limitations 
of  genealogy  with  which  we  started  are  dispensed  with. 
A  new  class  of  Israelites  receives  a  brotherly  welcome 
in  this  time  of  general  purification.  In  distinction  from 
the  returned  captives,  there  are  now  the  Israelites  who 
"  had  separated  themselves  unto  them  from  the  filthiness 
of  the  heathen  of  the  land,  to  seek  the  Lord."  Jehovah 
is  pointedly  described  as  ''  the  God  of  Israel " — i.e.,  the 
God  of  all  sections  of  Israel.f  These  people  cannot 
be  proselytes  from  heathenism — there  could  be  few  if 
any  such  in  exclusive  times.  They  might  consist  of 
Jews  who  had  been  living  in  Palestine  all  through  the 
captivity,  Israelites  also  left  in  the  Northern  Kingdom, 
and  scattered  members  of  the  ten  tribes  from  various 
regions.  All  such  are  welcome  on  condition  of  a  severe 
process  of  social  purging.  They  must  break  oiT  from 
their  heathen  associations.  We  may  suspect  a  spirit 
of  Jewish  animosity  in  the  ugly  phrase  "  the  filthiness 
of  the  heathen."     But  it  was  only  too  true  that  both 

*  Here,  at  Ezra  vi.  i8,  the  author  drops  the  Aramaic  language — 
which  was  introduced  at  iv.  8 — and  resumes  the  Hebrew.  See 
page  71. 

j  Ezra  vi.  21. 


Ezra  vi.  6-22.]    THE  DEDICATION  OF  THE   TEMPLE.       105 


the  Canaanite  and  the  Babylonian  habits  of  life  were 
disgustingly  immoral.  The  same  horrible  characteristic 
is  found  among  most  of  the  heathen  to-day.  These 
degraded  people  are  not  simply  benighted  in  theological 
error;  they  are  corrupted  by  horrible  vices.  Missionary 
work  is  more  than  the  propagation  of  Christian  theology; 
it  is  the  purging  of  Augean  stables.  St.  Paul  reminds 
us  that  we  must  put  away  the  old  leaven  of  sinful 
habits  in  order  to  partake  of  the  Christian  Passover,* 
and  St.  James  that  one  feature  of  the  religious  service 
which  is  acceptable  to  God  is  to  keep  oneself  unspotted 
from  the  world. f  Though  unfortunately  with  the 
externalism  of  the  Jews  their  purification  too  often  be- 
came a  mere  ceremon}',  and  their  separation  an  un- 
gracious race-exclusiveness,  still,  at  the  root  of  it,  the 
Passover  idea  here  brought  before  us  is  profoundly 
true.  It  is  the  thought  that  we  cannot  take  part  in  a 
sacred  feast  of  Divine  gladness  except  on  condition  of 
renouncing  sin.  The  joy  of  the  Lord  is  the  beatific 
vision  of  saints,  the  blessedness  of  the  pure  in  heart 
who  see  God. 

On  this  condition,  for  the  people  who  were  thus 
separate,  the  festival  was  a  scene  of  great  gladness.  The 
chronicler  calls  attention  to  three  things  that  were  in 
the  mind  of  the  Jews  inspiring  their  praises  throughout.  J 
The  first  is  that  God  was  the  source  of  their  joy — "  the 
Lord  had  made  them  joyful."  There  is  joy  in  religion ; 
and  this  joy  springs  from  God.  The  second  is  that 
God  had  brought  about  the  successful  end  of  their 
labours  by  directly  influencing  the  Great  King.  He 
had  "  turned  the  heart  of  the  king  of  Assyria  " — a  title 


*   I  Cor.  V.  7.  t  James  i.  27. 

J  E/ra  vi.  22. 


io6  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


for  Darius  that  speaks  for  the  authenticity  of  the 
narrative,  for  it  represents  an  old  form  of  speech  for 
the  ruler  of  the  districts  that  had  once  belonged  to  the 
king  of  Assyria.  The  third  fact  is  that  God  had  been 
the  source  of  strength  to  the  Jews,  so  that  they  had 
been  able  to  complete  their  work.  The  result  of  the 
Divine  aid  Vv^as  "  to  strengthen  their  hands  in  the  work 
of  the  house  of  God,  the  God  of  Israel."  Among  His 
own  people  joy  and  strength  from  God,  in  the  great 
world  a  providential  direction  of  the  mind  of  the  king — 
this  was  what  faith  now  perceived,  and  the  perception 
of  so  wonderful  a  Divine  activity  made  the  Passover  a 
festival  of  boundless  gladness.  Wherever  that  ancient 
Hebrew  faith  is  experienced  in  conjunction  with  the 
Passover  spirit  of  separation  from  the  leaven  of  sin 
religion  always  is  a  well  of  joy. 


CHAPTER   X. 

EZRA    THE  SCRIBE. 
Ezra  vii.   i-io. 

A  LTHOUGH  the  seventh  chapter  of  "  Ezra  "  begins 
i.  jL  with  no  other  indication  of  time  than  the  vague 
phrase  "  Now  after  these  things,"  nearly  sixty  years  had 
elapsed  between  the  events  recorded  in  the  previous 
chapter  and  the  mission  of  Ezra  here  described.  We 
have  no  history  of  this  long  period.  Zerubbabel 
passed  into  obscurity  without  leaving  any  trace  of 
his  later  years.  He  had  accomplished  his  work ;  the 
temple  had  been  built ;  but  the  brilliant  Messianic 
anticipations  that  had  clustered  about  him  at  the  out- 
set of  his  career  were  to  await  their  fulfilment  in  a 
greater  Son  of  David,  and  people  could  afford  to  neg- 
lect the  memory  of  the  man  who  had  only  been  a  sort 
of  temporary  trustee  of  the  hope  of  Israel.  We  shall 
come  across  indications  of  the  effects  of  social  trouble 
and  religious  decadence  in  the  state  of  Jerusalem  as 
she  appeared  at  the  opening  of  this  new  chapter  in  her 
history.  She  had  not  recovered  a  vestige  of  her  ancient 
civic  splendour ;  the  puritan  rigour  with  which  the 
returned  exiles  had  founded  a  Church  among  the  ruins 
of  her  political  greatness  had  been  relaxed,  so  that  the 
one  distinguishing  feature  of  the  humble  colony  was  in 
danger  of  melting  away  in  easy  and  friendly  associations 


io8  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

with  neighbouring  peoples.  When  it  came,  the  revival 
of  zeal  did  not  originate  in  the  Holy  City.  It  sprang  up 
among  the  Jews  at  Babylon.  The  earlier  movement 
in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  had  arisen  in  the  same  quarter. 
The  best  of  Judaism  was  no  product  of  the  soil  of 
Palestine:  it  was  an  exotic.  The  elementary  '^Torah" 
of  Moses  emerged  from  the  desert,  with  the  learning 
of  Egypt  as  its  background,  long  before  it  was  cul- 
tivated at  Jerusalem  to  blossom  in  the  reformation 
of  Josiah.  The  final  edition  of  The  Law  was  shaped 
in  the  Valley  of  the  Euphrates,  with  the  literature 
and  science  of  Babylon  to  train  its  editors  for  their 
great  task,  though  it  may  have  received  its  finishing 
touches  in  Jerusalem.  These  facts  by  no  means  ob- 
scure the  glory  of  the  inspiration  and  Divine  char- 
acter of  The  Law.  In  its  theology,  in  its  ethics,  in  its 
whole  spirit  and  character,  the  Pentateuch  is  no  more 
a  product  of  Babylonian  than  of  Egyptian  ideas.  Its 
purity  and  elevation  of  character  speak  all  the  more 
emphatically  for  its  Divine  origin  when  we  take  into 
account  its  corrupt  surroundings  ;  it  was  like  a  white 
lily  growing  on  a  dung-heap. 

Still  it  is  important  to  notice  that  the  great  religious 
revival  of  Ezra's  time  sprang  up  on  the  plains  of  Baby- 
lon, not  among  the  hills  of  Judah.  This  involves  two 
very  different  facts — the  peculiar  spiritual  experience 
with  which  it  commenced,  and  the  special  literary  and 
scientific  culture  in  the  midst  of  which  it  was  shaped. 

First,  it  originated  in  the  experience  of  the  captivity, 
in  humiliation  and  loss,  and  after  long  brooding  over  the 
meaning  of  the  great  chastisement.  The  exiles  were 
like  poets  who  ^'  learn  in  sorrow  what  they  teach  in 
song."  This  is  apparent  in  the  pathetic  psalms  of  the 
same  period,  and  in   the  writings  of  the  visionary  of 


Ezra  vii.  i-io.]  EZRA    THE  SCRIBE.  109 

Chebar,  who  contributed  a  large  share  to  the  new 
movement  in  view  of  the  re-estabhshment  of  religious 
worship  at  Jerusalem. 

Thus  Jerusalem  was  loved  by  the  exiles,  the  temple 
pictured  in  detail  to  the  imagination  of  men  who  never 
trod  its  sacred  courts,  and  the  sacrificial  system  most 
carefully  studied  by  people  who  had  no  means  of 
putting  it  in  practice.  No  doubt  The  Law  now  repre- 
sented an  intellectual  rather  than  a  concrete  form  of 
religion.  It  was  an  ideal.  So  long  as  the  real  is  with 
us,  it  tends  to  deprees  the  ideal  by  its  material  bulk  and 
weight.  The  ideal  is  elevated  in  the  absence  of  the 
real.  Therefore  the  pauses  of  life  are  invaluable ;  by 
breaking  through  the  iron  routine  of  habit,  they  give 
us  scope  for  the  growth  of  larger  ideas  that  may  lead 
to  better  attainments. 

Secondly,  this  religious  revival  appeared  in  a  centre 
of  scientific  and  literary  culture.  The  Babylonians 
"  had  cultivated  arithmetic,  astronomy,  history,  chrono- 
logy, geography,  comparative  philology,  and  gram- 
mar." *  In  astronomy  they  were  so  advanced  that 
they  had  mapped  out  the  heavens,  catalogued  the  fixed 
stars,  calculated  eclipses,  and  accounted  for  them  cor- 
rectly. Their  enormous  libraries  of  terra-cotta,  only 
now  being  unearthed,  testify  to  their  literary  activity. 
The  Jews  brought  back  from  Babylon  the  names  of  the 
months,  the  new  form  of  letters  used  in  writing  their 
books,  and  many  other  products  of  the  learning  and 
science  of  the  Euphrates.  Internally  the  religion  of 
Israel  is  solitary,  pure.  Divine.  Externally  the  literary 
form  of  it,  and  the  physical  conception  of  the  universe 
which  it  embodies,  owe  not  a  little  to  the  light  which 

*  Rawlinson,  "  Ezra  and  Nehcmiah,"'  p.  2. 


no  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


God  had  bestowed  upon  the  people  of  Babylon ;  just 
as  Christianity,  in  soul  and  essence  the  religion  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth,  was  shaped  in  theory  by  the  thought, 
and  in  discipline  by  the  law  and  order,  with  which  God 
had  endowed  the  two  great  European  races  of  Greece 
and  Rome. 

The  chronicler  introduces  Ezra  Vv^ith  a  brief  sketch  of 
his  origin  and  a  bare  outline  of  his  expedition  to  Jeru- 
salem.* He  then  next  transcribes  a  copy  of  the  edict 
of  Artaxerxes  which  authorised  the  expedition. f  After 
this  he  inserts  a  detailed  account  of  the  expedition  from 
the  pen  of  Ezra  himself,  so  that  here  the  narrative 
proceeds  in  the  first  person — though,  in  the  abrupt 
manner  of  the  whole  book,  without  a  word  of  warning 
that  this  is  to  be  the  case.J 

In  the  opening  verses  of  Ezra  vii.  the  chronicler  gives 
an  epitome  of  the  genealogy  of  Ezra,  passing  over 
several  generations,  but  leading  up  to  Aaron.  Ezra, 
then,  could  claim  a  high  birth.  He  was  a  born  priest 
of  the  select  family  of  Zadok,  but  not  of  the  later  house 
of  high-priests.  Therefore  the  privileges  which  are 
assigned  to  that  house  in  the  Pentateuch  cannot  be 
accounted  for  by  ascribing  ignoble  motives  of  nepotism 
to  its  publisher.  Though  Ezra  is  named  "  The  Priest," 
he  is  more  familiarly  known  to  us  as  "'  The  Scribe." 
The  chronicler  calls  him  "  a  ready  scribe  "  (or,  a  scribe 
skilful)  ''in  the  law  of  Moses,  which  the  Lord  God 
of  Israel  had  given."  Originally  the  title  ''  Scribe " 
was  used  for  town  recorders  and  registrars  of  the 
census.  Under  the  later  kings  of  Judah;  persons 
bearing  this  name  were   attached  to  the  court  as  the 


*  Ezra  vii.  l-io,  •)■  Ezra  vii.  1 1 -26. 

\  Ezra  vii.  27 — ix. 


Ezra  vii.  i-io.]  EZRA  ^THE  SCRIBE.  Ill 


writers  and  custodians  of  state  documents.  But  these 
are  all  quite  distinct  from  the  scribes  who  appeared 
after  the  exile.  The  scribes  of  later  days  were  guar- 
dians and  interpreters  of  the  written  Torah,  the  sacred 
law.  They  appeared  with  the  publication  and  adoption 
of  the  Pentateuch.  They  not  only  studied  and  taught 
this  complete  law;  they  interpreted  and  applied  its 
precepts.  In  so  doing  they  had  to  pronounce  judg- 
ments of  their  own.  Inasmuch  as  changing  circum- 
stances necessarily  required  modifications  in  rules  of 
justice,  while  The  Law  could  not  be  altered  after  Ezra's 
day,  gr^t  ingenuity  was  required  to  reconcile  the  old 
lav/  with  the  new  decisions.  Thus  arose  sophistical 
casuistry.  Then  in  ^'  fencing "  The  Law  the  scribes 
added  precepts  of  their  own  to  prevent  men  from 
coming  near  the  danger  of  transgression. 

Scribism  was  one  of  the  most  remarkable  features 
of  the  later  days  of  Israel.  Its  existence  in  so  much 
prominence  showed  that  religion  had  passed  into  a  new 
phase,  that  it  had  assumed  a  literary  aspect.  The  art  of 
writing  was  known,  indeed,  in  Egypt  and  Babylon  before 
the  exodus ;  it  was  even  practised  in  Palestine  among 
the  Hittites  as  early  as  Abraham.  But  at  first  in  their 
religious  life  the  Jews  did  not  give  much  heed  to 
literary  documents.  Priestism  was  regulated  by  tradi- 
tional usages  rather  than  by  written  directions,  and 
justice  was  administered  under  the  kings  according  to 
custom,  precedent,  and  equity.  Quite  apart  from  the 
discussion  concerning  the  antiquity  of  the  Pentateuch, 
it  is  certain  that  its  precepts  were  neither  used  nor 
known  in  the  time  of  Josiah,  when  the  reading  of  the 
roll  discovered  in  the  temple  was  listened  to  with  amaze- 
ment. Still  less  did  prophetism  rely  on  literary  re- 
sources.    What  need  was  there  of  a   book   when  the 


112  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

Spirit  of  God  was  speaking  through  the  audible  voice 
of  a  living  man  ?  At  first  the  prophets  were  men  of 
action.  In  more  cultivated  times  they  became  orators, 
and  then  their  speeches  were  sometimes  preserved — as 
the  speeches  of  Demosthenes  were  preserved — for  future 
reference,  after  their  primary  end  had  been  served. 
Jeremiah  found  it  necessary  to  have  a  scribe,  Baruch, 
to  write  down  his  utterances.  This  was  a  further  step 
in  the  direction  of  literature  ;  and  Ezekiel  was  almost 
entirely  literary,  for  his  prophecies  were  most  of  them 
written  in  the  first  instance.  Still  they  were  prophecies ; 
i.e.,  they  were  original  utterances,  drawn  directly  from 
the  wells  of  inspiration.  The  function  of  the  scribes 
was  more  humble — to  collect  the  sayings  and  traditions 
of  earlier  ages  ;  to  arrange  and  edit  the  literary  frag- 
ments of  more  original  minds.  Their  own  originality  was 
almost  confined  to  their  explanations  of  difficult  passages, 
or  their  adaptation  of  what  they  received  to  new  needs 
and  new  circumstances.  Thus  we  see  theology  passing 
into  the  reflective  stage  :  it  is  becoming  historical ;  it 
is  being  transformed  into  a  branch  of  archaeology.  Ezra 
the  Scribe  is  nervously  anxious  to  claim  the  authority 
of  Moses  for  what  he  teaches.  The  robust  spirit  of 
Isaiah  was  troubled  with  no  such  scruple.  Scribism 
rose  when  prophecy  declined.  It  was  a  melancholy 
confession  that  the  fountains  of  living  water  were  drying 
up.  It  was  like  an  aqueduct  laboriously  constructed  in 
order  to  convey  stored  water  to  a  thirsty  people  from 
distant  reservoirs.  The  reservoirs  may  be  full,  the 
aqueduct  may  be  sound ;  still  who  would  not  rather 
drink  of  the  sparkhng  stream  as  it  springs  from  the  rock  ? 
Moreover  scribism  degenerated  into  ,  rabbinism,  the 
scholasticism  of  the  Jews.  We  may  see  its  counter- 
part in  the  Catholic  scholasticism  which  drew  supplies 


:zra  vii.  i-io.]  EZRA    THE  SCRIBE.  113 


from  patristic  tradition,  and  again  in  Protestant  schola- 
sticism— which  came  nearer  to  the  source  of  inspiration 
in  the  Bible,  and  yet  which  stiffened  into  a  traditional 
interpretation  of  Scripture,  confining  its  waters  to  iron 
pipes  of  orthodoxy. 

But  some  men  refuse  to  be  thus  tied  to  antiquarianism. 
They  dare  to  believe  that  the  Spirit  of  God  is  still  in 
the  world,  whispering    in  the  fancy  of  little  children, 
soothing  weary  souls,  thundering  in  the  conscience  of 
sinners,    enlightening    honest    inquirers,    guiding    per- 
plexed   men   of    faith.      Nevertheless  we    are    always 
in    danger    of  one    or    other  of  the   two  extremes  of 
formal    scholasticism    and    indefinite    mysticism.     The 
good  side  of  the  scribes'  function  is  suggestive  of  much 
that  is  valuable.     If  God  did  indeed  speak  to  men  of 
old  ''  in  divers  portions  and  in  divers  manners,"  *  what 
He  said  must  be  of  the  greatest  value  to  us,  for  truth 
in  its  essence  is  eternal.     We  Christians  have  the  solid 
foundation  of  a  historical  faith  to  build  upon,  and  we 
cannot  dispense  with  our  gospel  narratives  and  doctrinal 
epistles.     What  Christ  was,  what  Christ  did,  and  the 
meaning  of  all  this,  is  of  vital  importance  to  us  ;  but  it 
is  chiefly  important  because  it  enables  us  to  see  what 
He  is  to-day — a  Priest  ever  living  to  make  intercession 
for  us,  a  Deliverer  who  is  even  now  able  to  save  unto 
the    uttermost    all    who    come    unto    God    by    Him,    a 
present  Lord  who  claims  the  active  loyalty  of  every 
fresh  generation  of  the  men  and  women  for  whom  He 
died   in    the  far-off  past.     We  have    to    combine    the 
concrete    historical    religion    with    the    inward,    living, 
spiritual  religion  to  reach  a  faith  that  shall  be  true  both 
objectively  and  subjectively — true   to   the   facts  of  the 
universe,  and  true  to  personal  experience. 

♦  Heb.  i.  I. 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


Ezra,  accomplished  his  great  work,  to  a  large  extent, 
because  he  ventured  to  be  more  than  a  scribe.  Even 
when  he  was  relying  on  the  authority  of  antiquity,  the 
inspiration  which  was  in  him  saved  him  from  a  pedantic 
adherence  to  the  letter  of  the  Torah  as  he  had  received 
it.  The  modification  of  The  Law  when  it  was  reissued 
by  the  great  scribe,  v/hich  is  so  perplexing  to  some 
modern  readers,  is  a  proof  that  the  religion  of  Israel 
had  not  yet  lost  vitality  and  settled  down  into  a  fossil 
condition.  It  was  living ;  therefore  it  was  growing, 
and  in  growing  it  was  casting  its  old  shell  and  evolv- 
ing a  new  vesture  better  adapted  to  its  changed 
environment.  Is  not  this  just  a  signal  proof  that  God 
had  not  deserted  His  people  ? 

Ezra  is  presented  to  us  as  a  man  of  a  deeply  devout 
nature.  He  cultivated  his  own  personal  religion  before 
he  attempted  to  influence  his  compatriots.  The  chro- 
nicler tells  us  that  he  had  prepared  (directed)  his  heart, 
to  seek  the  law  of  the  Lord  and  to  do  it.  With  our 
haste  to  obtain  "  results  "  in  Christian  service,  there  is 
danger  lest  the  need  of  personal  preparation  should 
be  neglected.  But  work  is  feeble  and  fruitless  if  the 
worker  is  inefficient,  and  he  must  be  quite  as  inefficient 
if  he  has  not  the  necessary  graces  as  if  he  had  not  the 
requisite  gifts.  Over  and  above  the  preparatory  intellec- 
tual culture — never  more  needed  than  in  our  own  day — 
there  is  the  all-essential  spiritual  training.  We  cannot 
effectually  win  others  to  that  truth  which  has  no  place 
in  our  own  hearts.  Enthusiasm  is  kindled  by  enthu- 
siasm. The  fire  must  be  first  burning  within  the 
preacher  himself  if  he  would  light  it  in  the  breasts  of 
other  men.  Here  lies  the  secret  of  the  tremendous  influ- 
ence Ezra  exerted  v/hen  he  came  to  Jerusalem.  He 
was  an  enthusiast  for  the  law  he  so  zealously  advocated. 


Ezra  vii.  i-io.]  EZRA    THE  SCRIBE. 


Now  enthusiasm  is  not  the  creation  of  a  moment's 
thought ;  it  is  the  outgrowth  of  long  meditation,  in- 
spired by  deep,  passionate  love.  It  shows  itself  in 
the  experience  expressed  by  the  Psalmist  when  he  said, 
"  While  I  mused  the  fire  burned."  *  Ours  is  not  an  age 
of  musing.  But  if  we  have  no  time  to  meditate  over 
the  great  verities  of  our  faith,  the  flames  will  not  be 
kindled,  and  in  place  of  the  glowing  fire  of  enthusiasm 
we  shall  have  the  gritty  ashes  of  officiaHsm. 

Ezra  turned  his  thoughts  to  the  law  of  his  God ;  he 
took  this  for  the  subject  of  his  daily  meditation,  brooding 
over  it  until  it  became  a  part  of  his  own  thinking.  This 
is  the  way  a  character  is  made.  Men  have  larger  power 
over  their  thoughts  than  they  are  incHned  to  admit ;  and 
the  greatness  or  the  meanness,  the  purity  or  the  cor- 
ruption of  their  character  depends  on  the  way  in  which 
that  power  is  used.  Evil  thoughts  may  come  unbidden 
to  the  purest  mind — for  Christ  was  tempted  by  the 
devil ;  but  such  thoughts  can  be  resisted,  and  treated 
as  unwelcome  intruders.  The  thoughts  that  are  wel- 
comed and  cherished,  nourished  in  meditation,  and 
sedulously  cultivated — these  bosom  friends  of  the  inner 
man  determine  what  he  himself  is  to  become.  To 
allow  one's  mind  to  be  treated  as  the  plaything  of 
every  idle  reverie — like  a  boat  drifting  at  the  mercy  of 
wind  and  current  without  a  hand  at  the  helm — is  to 
court  intellectual  and  moral  shipwreck.  The  first  con- 
dition of  achieving  success  in  self-culture  is  to  direct 
the  course  of  the  thinking  aright.  St.  Paul  enumerated 
a  list  of  good  and  honourable  subjects  to  bid  us  "  think 
on  "  such  things.! 

The  aim  of  Ezra's  meditation  was  threefold.  First, 
he  would  "  seek  the  law  of  the  Lord,"  for  the  teacher 

*  Psalm  xxxix.  3.  f  Phil.  iv.  8, 


ii6  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

must  begin  with  understanding  the  truth,  and  this  may 
involve  much  anxious  searching.  Possibly  Ezra  had 
to  pursue  a  literary  inquiry,  hunting  up  documents, 
comparing  data,  arranging  and  harmonising  scattered 
fragments.  But  the  most  important  part  of  his  seeking 
was  his  effort  to  find  the  real  meaning  and  purpose  of 
The  Law.  It  was  in  regard  to  this  that  he  would  have 
to  exercise  his  mind  m^ost  earnestly.  Secondly,  his  aim 
was  '^  to  do  it."  He  would  not  attempt  to  preach  what 
he  had  not  tried  to  perform.  He  would  test  the  effect 
of  his  doctrine  on  himself  before  venturing  to  prescribe 
it  for  others.  Thus  he  would  be  most  sure  of  escaping 
a  subtle  snare  which  too  often  entraps  the  preacher. 
When  the  godly  man  of  business  reads  his  Bible,  it  is 
just  to  find  light  and  food  for  his  own  soul;  but  when 
the  preacher  turns  the  pages  of  the  sacred  book,  he  is 
haunted  by  the  anxiety  to  light  upon  suitable  subjects 
for  his  sermons.  Every  man  who  handles  religious 
truths  in  the  course  of  his  work  is  in  danger  of  coming 
to  regard  those  truths  as  the  tools  of  his  trade.  If  he 
succumbs  to  this  danger  it  will  be  to  his  own  personal 
loss,  and  then  even  as  instruments  in  his  work  the 
degraded  truths  will  be  blunt  and  inefficient,  because  a 
man  can  never  know  the  doctrine  until  he  has  begun  to 
obe}^  the  commandment.  If  religious  teaching  is  not 
to  be  pedantic  and  unreal,  it  must  be  interpreted  by 
experience.  The  most  vivid  teaching  is  a  transcript 
from  hfe.  Thirdly,  Ezra  would  ''  teach  in  Israel  statutes 
and  judgments."  This  necessarily  comes  last — after 
the  meditation,  after  the  experience.  But  it  is  of  great 
significance  as  the  crown  and  finish  of  the  rest.  Ezra 
is  to  be  his  nation's  instructor.  In  the  new  order  the 
first  place  is  not  to  be  reserved  for  a  king ;  it  is  assigned 
to  a  schoolmaster. 


Ezra  vii.  i-io.]  EZRA    THE  SCRIBE.  117 


This  will  be  increasingly  the  case  as  knowledge  is 
allowed  to  prevail,  and  as  truth  is  permitted  to  sway 
the  lives  of  men  and  fashion  the  history  of  com- 
munities. 

So  far  we  have  Ezra's  own  character  and  culture. 
But  there  was  another  side  to  his  preparation  for  his 
great  life-work  of  which  the  chronicler  took  note,  and 
which  he  described  in  a  favourite  phrase  of  Ezra's,  a 
phrase  so  often  used  by  the  scribe  that  the  later  writer 
adopted  it  quite  naturally.  Ezra's  request  to  be  per- 
mitted to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  with  a  new  expedition  is 
said  to  have  been  granted  him  by  the  king  "  according 
to  the  hand  of  the  Lord  his  God  upon  him."  *  Thus 
the  chronicler  here  acknowledges  the  Divine  hand  in 
the  whole  business,  as  he  has  the  inspired  insight  to 
do  again  and  again  in  the  course  of  his  narrative. 
The  special  phrase  thus  borrowed  from  Ezra  is  rich  in 
meaning.  In  an  earlier  passage  the  chronicler  noticed 
that  "the  eye  of  their  God  was  upon  the  elders  of  the 
Jews."  t  Now,  in  Ezra's  phrase,  it  is  the  haitd  of  his 
God  that  is  on  Ezra.  The  expression  gives  us  a 
distinct  indication  of  the  Divine  activity.  God  works, 
and,  so  to  speak,  uses  His  hand.  It  also  suggests  the 
nearness  of  God.  The  hand  of  God  is  not  only  moving 
and  acting ;  it  is  upon  Ezra.  God  touches  the  man, 
holds  him,  directs  him,  impels  him  ;  and,  as  he  shows 
elsewhere,  Ezra  is  conscious  of  the  influence,  if  not 
immediately,  yet  by  means  of  a  devout  study  of  the 
providential  results.  This  Divine  power  even  goes  so 
far  as  to  move  the  Persian  monarch.  The  chronicler 
ascribes  the  conduct  of  successive  kings  of  Persia  to 
the  immediate  action  of  God.     But  here  it  is  connected 

*  Ezra  Yii.  6.  t  Ezra  v.  5. 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,    AND  ESTHER. 


with  God's  hand  being  on  Ezra.  When  God  is  holding 
and  directing  His  servants,  even  external  circumstances 
are  found  to  work  for  their  good,  and  even  other  men 
are  induced  to  further  the  same  end.  This  brings  us 
to  the  kernel,  the  very  essence  of  religion.  That  was  not 
found  in  Ezra's  wisely  chosen  meditations ;  nor  was  it 
to  be  seen  in  his  devout  practices.  Behind  and  beneath 
the  man's  earnest  piety  was  the  unseen  but  mighty 
action  of  God  ;  and  here,  in  the  hand  of  his  God  resting 
upon  him,  was  the  root  of  all  his  religious  Hfe.  In 
experience  the  human  and  the  Divine  elements  of 
religion  are  inextricably  blended  together ;  but  the  vital 
element,  that  which  originates  and  dominates  the  whole, 
is  the  Divine.  There  is  no  real,  living  religion  without 
it.  It  is  the  secret  of  energy  and  the  assurance  of 
victory.  The  man  of  true  religion  is  he  who  has  the 
hand  of  God  resting  upon  him,  he  whose  thought  and 
action  are  inspired  and  swayed  by  the  mystic  touch 
of  the   Unseen. 


CHAPTER   XI. 

EZRA'S  EXPEDITION. 
Ezra  vii.  1 1 — ^viii. 

LIKE  the  earlier  pilgrimage  of  Zerubbabel  and  his 
companions,  Ezra's  great  expedition  was  carried 
out  under  a  commission  from  the  Persian  monarch 
of  his  day.  The  chronicler  simply  calls  this  king 
**  Artaxerxes  "  (Artahshashta),  a  name  borne  by  three 
kings  of  Persia ;  but  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt 
that  his  reference  is  to  the  son  and  successor  of  Xerxes 
— known  by  the  Greeks  as  "  Macrocheir,"  and  by  the 
Romans  as  "  Longimanus  " — Artaxerxes  ''  of  the  long 
hand,"  for  this  Artaxerxes  alone  enjoyed  a  sufficientl}' 
extended  reign  to  include  both  the  commencement  of 
Ezra's  public  work  and  the  later  scenes  in  the  life  of 
Nehemiah  which  the  chronicler  associates  with  the 
same  king.  Artaxerxes  was  but  a  boy  when  he  as- 
cended the  throne,  and  the  mission  of  Ezra  took  place 
in  his  earlier  years,  while  the  generous  enthusiasm  of  the 
kindly  sovereign — whose  gentleness  has  become  historic 
— had  not  yet  been  crushed  by  the  cares  of  empire.  In 
accordance  with  the  usual  style  of  our  narrative,  we  have 
his  decree  concerning  the  Jews  preserved  and  tran- 
scribed in  full ;  and  yet  here,  as  in  other  cases,  we  must 
make  some  allowance  either  for  the  literary  freedom 
of  the  chronicler,  or  for  the  Jewish  sympathies  of  the 


120  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

translator ;  for  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  a  heathen, 
such  as  Artaxerxes  undoubtedly  was,  would  have 
shown  the  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  religion,  or  have 
owned  the  faith  in  it,  which  the  edict  as  we  now  have  it 
suggests.  Nevertheless,  here  again,  there  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  the  substantial  accuracy  of  the  document,  for 
it  is  quite  in  accord  with  the  policy  of  the  previous 
kings  C37rus  and  Darius,  and  in  its  special  features  it 
entirely  agrees  with  the  circumstances  of  the  history. 

This  edict    of  Longimanus  goes  beyond  any  of  its 
predecessors   in    favouring   the   Jews,    especially  with 
regard  to  their  religion.     It  is  directly  and  personally 
addressed  to  Ezra,  whom  the  king  may  have  known  as 
an  earnest,  zealous  leader  of  the  Hebrew  community  at 
Babylon,  and  through  him  it  grants  to  all  Jewish  exiles 
who  wish  to  go  up  to  Jerusalem  liberty  to  return  to  the 
home  of  their  fathers.       It  may  be  objected   that  after 
the  decree    of  C3'rus   any   such  fresh  sanction  should 
not    have    been    needed.       But   two    generations   had 
passed  away  since  the  pilgrimage  of  the  first  body  of 
returning    captives,    and   during   this  long  time  many 
things  had  happened  to  check  the  free  action   of  the 
Jev/s  and  to  cast  reproach  upon  their  movements.     For 
a  great  expedition  to  start  now  without  any  orders  fron^ 
the  reigning  monarch  might  excite  his  displeasure,  ar. 
a  subject  people    who  were  dependent   for  their   ve' 
existence    on   the  good-will   of  an  absolute   soverei^ 
would  naturally  hesitate  before  they  ventured  to  rous  . 
his  suspicions  by  undertaking  any  considerable  migration 
on  their  own  account. 

But  Artaxerxes  does  much  more  than  sanction  the 
journey  to  Jerusalem  ;  he  furthers  the  object  of  this 
journey  with  royal  bounty,  and  he  lays  a  ver}^  important 
commission  on  Ezra,  a  commission  which  carries  with 


Ezra  vii.  II— viii.]      EZRA'S  EXPEDITION. 


it  the  power,  if  not  the  name,  of  a  provincial  magistrate. 
In  the  first  place,  the  edict  authorises  a  state  endowment 
of  the  Jewish  religion.  Ezra  is  to  carry  great  stores  to 
the  poverty-stricken  community  at  Jerusalem.  These  are 
made  up  in  part  of  contributions  from  the  Babylonian 
Jews,  in  part  of  generous  gifts  from  their  friendly 
neighbours,  and  in  part  of  grants  from  the  royal 
treasury.  The  temple  has  been  rebuilt,  and  the  funds 
now  accumulated  are  not  like  the  bulk  of  those  collected 
in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  for  a  definite  object,  the  cost  of 
which  might  be  set  down  to  the  ''  Capital  Account "  in 
the  restoration  of  the  Jews ;  they  are  destined  in  some 
measure  for  improvements  to  the  structure,  but  they 
are  also  to  be  employed  in  maintenance  charges,  es- 
pecially in  supporting  the  costly  services  of  the  temple. 
Thus  the  actual  performance  of  the  daily  ritual  at  the 
Jerusalem  sanctuary  is  to  be  kept  up  by  means  of  the 
revenues  of  the  Persian  Empire.  Then,  the  edict  pro- 
ceeds to  favour  the  priesthood  by  freeing  that  order  from 
the  burden  of  taxation.  This  "clerical  immunity," 
which  suggests  an  analogy  with  the  privileges  the 
Christian  clergy  prized  so  highly  in  the  Middle  Ages, 
is  an  indirect  form  of  increased  endowment,  but  the 
r. manner  in  which  the  endowment  is  granted  calls 
Sc.*special  attention  to  the  privileged  status  of  the  order 
cehat  enjoys  it.  Thus  the  growing  importance  of  the 
in  erusalem  hierarchy  is  openly  fostered  by  the  Persian 
kking.  Still  further,  Artaxerxes  adds  to  his  endowment 
of  the  Jewish  religion  a  direct  legal  establishment. 
Ezra  is  charged  to  see  that  the  law  of  his  God  is 
observed  throughout  the  whole  region  extending  up 
from  the  Euphrates  to  Jerusalem.  This  can  only  be 
meant  to  apply  to  the  Jews  who  were  scattered  over  the 
wide  area,  especially  those  of  Syria.     Still  the  mandate 


122  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

is  startling  enough,  especially  when  we  take  into  account 
the  heavy  sanctions  with  which  it  is  weighted,  for 
Ezra  has  authority  given  him  to  enforce  obedience  by 
excommunication,  by  fine,  by  imprisonment,  and  even 
by  the  death-penalty.  "  The  law  of  his  God  "  is  named 
side  by  side  with  "  the  law  of  the  king,"  *  and  the  two 
are  to  be  obeyed  equally.  Fortunately,  owing  to  the 
unsettled  condition  of  the  country  as  well  as  to  Ezra's 
own  somewhat  unpractical  disposition,  the  reformer 
never  seems  to  have  put  his  great  powers  fully  to  the 
test. 

Now,  as  in  the  previous  cases  of  Cyrus  and  Darius, 
we  are  confronted  with  the  question,  How  came  the 
Persian  king  to  issue  such  a  decree  ?  It  has  been 
suggested  that  as  Egypt  was  in  revolt  at  the  time,  he 
desired  to  strengthen  the  friendly  colony  at  Jerusalem 
as  a  western  bulwark.  But,  as  we  have  seen  in  the 
case  of  Cyrus,  the  Jews  were  too  few  and  feeble  to  be 
taken  much  account  of  among  the  gigantic  forces  of  the 
vast  empire;  and,  moreover,  it  was  not  the  military 
fortification  of  Jerusalem — certainly  a  valuable  strong- 
hold when  well  maintained — but  the  religious  services 
of  the  temple  and  the  observance  of  The  Law  that  this 
edict  aimed  at  aiding  and  encouraging.  No  doubt  in 
times  of  unsettlement  the  king  would  behave  most 
favourably  towards  a  loyal  section  of  his  people.  Still, 
more  must  be  assigned  as  an  adequate  motive  for  his 
action.  Ezra  is  charged  as  a  special  commissioner  to 
investigate  the  condition  of  the  Jews  in  Palestine.  He 
is  to  ''  inquire  concerning  Judah  and  Jerusalem."  f  In- 
asmuch as  it  was  customary  for  the  Persian  monarchs 
to  send  out  inspectors  from  time  to  time   to  examine 


Ezra  vii.  26.  -j-   Ezra  vii.  14. 


Ezra  vii.  II— viii.]       EZRA'S   EXPEDITION.  123 


and  report  on  the  condition  of  the  more  remote  districts 
of  their  extensive  empire,  it  has  been  plausibly  suggested 
that  Ezra  may  have  been  similarly  employed.  But 
in  the  chronicler's  report  of  the  edict  we  read,  imme- 
diately after  the  injunction  to  make  the  investigation, 
an  important  addition  describing  how  this  was  to  be 
done,  viz.,  "  According  to  the  law  of  thy  God  which  is 
in  thine  hand,"  *  which  shows  that  Ezra's  inquiry  was 
to  be  of  a  religious  character,  and  as  a  preliminary  to 
the  exaction  of  obedience  to  the  Jewish  law.  It  may 
be  said  that  this  clause  was  not  a  part  of  the  original 
decree  ;  but  the  drift  of  the  edict  is  religious  throughout 
rather  than  political,  and  therefore  the  clause  in  question 
is  fully  in  harmony  with  its  character.  There  is  one 
sentence  which  is  of  the  deepest  significance,  if  only  we 
can  believe  that  it  embodies  an  original  utterance  of  the 
king  himself — ^'  Whatsoever  is  commanded  by  the  God 
of  heaven,  let  it  be  done  exactly  for  the  house  of  the 
God  of  heaven ;  for  why  sJiouid  there  be  wrath  against 
the  realm  of  the  king  and  his  sons  ? "  f  While  his 
empire  was  threatened  by  dangerous  revolts,  Artaxerxes 
seems  to  have  desired  to  conciliate  the  God  whom  the 
most  devout  of  his  people  regarded  v*^ith  supreme  awe. 
What  is  more  clear  and  at  the  same  time  more 
important  is  the  great  truth  detected  by  Ezra  and 
recorded  by  him  in  a  grateful  burst  of  praise.  Without 
any  warning  the  chronicler  suddenly  breaks  off  his 
own  narrative,  written  in  the  third  person,  to  insert  a 
narrative  written  by  Ezra  himself  in  the  first  person- 
beginning  at  Ezra  vii.  27  and  continued  down  to  Ezra  x. 
The  scribe  opens  by  blessing  God — "the  Lord  God  of 
our  fathers,"  who  had  "  put  such  a  thing  in  the  king's 


*  Ezra  vii.  14.  f  Ezra  vii.  23. 


124  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


heart  as  to  beautify  the  house  of  the  Lord  which  is 
in  Jerusalem."  *  This,  then,  was  a  Divine  movement. 
It  can  only  be  accounted  for  by  ascribing  the  original 
impulse  to  God.  Natural  motives  of  policy  or  of  super- 
stition may  have  been  providentially  manipulated,  but 
the  hand  that  used  them  was  the  hand  of  God.  The 
man  who  can  perceive  this  immense  fact  at  the  very 
outset  of  his  career  is  fit  for  any  enterprise.  His  trans- 
cendent faith  will  carry  him  through  difficulties  that 
would  be  insuperable  to  the  worldly  schemer. 

Passing  from  the  thought  of  the  Divine  influence  on 
Artaxerxes,  Ezra  further  praises  God  because  he  has 
himself  received  ''  mercy  .  .  .  before  the  king  and  his 
counsellors,  and  before  all  the  king's  mighty  princes."  f 
This  personal  thanksgiving  is  evidently  called  forth  by 
the  scribe's  consideration  of  the  part  assigned  to  him 
in  the  royal  edict.  There  was  enough  in  that  edict  to 
make  the  head  of  a  self-seeking,  ambitious  man  swim 
with  vanity.  But  we  can  see  from  the  first  that  Ezra 
is  of  a  higher  character.  The  burning  passion  that 
consumes  him  has  not  a  particle  of  hunger  for  self- 
aggrandisement  ;  it  is  v/holly  generated  by  devotion  to 
the  law  of  his  God.  In  the  narrowness  and  bigotry 
that  characterise  his  later  conduct  as  a  reformer,  some 
may  suspect  the  action  of  that  subtle  self-v/ili  which 
creeps  unawares  into  the  conduct  of  some  of  the 
noblest  men.  Still  the  last  thing  that  Ezra  seeks,  and 
the  last  thing  that  he  cares  for  when  it  is  thrust  upon 
him,  is  the  glory  of  earthly  greatness. 

Ezra's  aim  in  leading  the  expedition  may  be  gathered 
from  the  reflection  of  it  in  the  royal  edict,  since  that 
edict  was  doubtless  drawn  up  with  the  express  purpose 

*  Ezra  vii.  27.  f  Ezra  vii.  28. 


Ezra  vii.  II— viii.]       EZRA'S  EXPEDITION.  125 


of  furthering  the  project  of  the  favoured  Jew.  Ezra 
puts  the  beautifying  of  the  temple  in  the  front  of  his 
grateful  words  of  praise  to  God.  But  the  personal 
commission  entrusted  to  Ezra  goes  much  further.  The 
decree  significantly  recognises  the  fact  that  he  is  to 
carry  up  to  Jerusalem  a  copy  of  the  Sacred  Law.  It 
refers  to  *'  the  law  of  thy  God  which  is  in  thine  hand."  * 
We  shall  hear  more  of  this  hereafter.  Meanwhile  it  is 
important  to  see  that  the  law,  obedience  to  which  Ezra 
is  empowered  to  exact,  is  to  be  conveyed  by  him  to 
Jerusalem.  Thus  he  is  both  to  introduce  it  to  the 
notice  of  the  people,  and  to  see  that  it  does  not  remain 
a  dead  letter  among  them.  He  is  to  teach  it  to  those 
who  do  not  know  it.f  At  the  same  time  these  people 
are  distinctly  separated  from  others,  who  are  expressly 
described  as  "  all  such  as  know  the  laws  of  thy  God."  J 
This  plainly  implies  that  both  the  Jerusalem  Jews,  and 
those  west  of  the  Euphrates  generally,  were  not  all  of 
them  ignorant  of  the  Divine  Torah.  Some  of  them,  at 
all  events,  knew  the  laws  they  were  to  be  made  to 
obey.  Still  they  may  not  have  possessed  them  in  any 
written  form.  The  plural  term  '^  laws "  is  here  used, 
while  the  written  compilation  which  Ezra  carried  up 
with  him  is  described  in  the  singular  as  ''The  Law." 
Ezra,  then,  having  searched  out  The  Law  and  tested  it 
in  his  own  experience,  is  now  eager  to  take  it  up  to 
Jerusalem,  and  get  it  executed  among  his  fellow- 
countrymen  at  the  religious  metropolis  as  well  as 
among  the  scattered  Jews  of  the  provincial  districts. 
His  great  purpose  is  to  make  what  he  believes  to  be 
the  will  of  God  known,  and  to  see  that  it  is  obeyed. 


Ezra  vii.  14.  f  Ezra  vii.  25, 

X  Ibid. 


126  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


The  very  idea  of  a  Torah  implies  a  Divine  will  in 
religion.  It  presses  upon  our  notice  the  often-forgotten 
fact  that  God  has  something  to  say  to  us  about  our 
conduct,  that  when  we  are  serving  Him  it  is  not  enough 
to  be  zealous,  that  we  must  also  be  obedient.  Obedience 
is  the  keynote  of  Judaism.  It  is  not  less  prominent  in 
Christianity.  The  only  difference  is  that  Christians 
are  freed  from  the  shackles  of  a  literal  law  in  order 
that  they  may  carry  out  ''  the  law  of  liberty,"  by  doing 
the  will  of  God  from  the  heart  as  loyal  disciples  of 
Jesus  Christ,  so  that  for  us,  as  for  the  Jews,  obedience 
is  the  most  fundamental  fact  of  religion.  We  can 
walk  by  faith  in  the  freedom  of  sons ;  but  that  implies 
that  we  have  **  the  obedience  of  faith."  The  ruling 
principle  of  our  Lord's  life  is  expressed  in  the  words 
^'I  delight  to  do  Thy  will,  O  My  God,"  and  this 
must  be  the  ruling  principle  in  the  life  of  every  true 
Christian. 

Equipped  with  a  ro3^al  edict,  provided  with  rich  con- 
tributions, inspired  with  a  great  religious  purpose, 
confident  that  the  hand  of  his  God  was  upon  him,  Ezra 
collected  his  volunteers,  and  proceeded  to  carry  out  his 
commission  with  all  practicable  speed.  In  his  record 
of  the  journey,  he  first  sets  down  a  list  of  the  families 
that  accompanied  him.  It  is  interesting  to  notice  names 
that  had  occurred  in  the  earlier  list  of  the  followers  of 
Zerubbabel,  showing  that  some  of  the  descendants  of 
those  who  refused  to  go  on  the  first  expedition  took 
part  in  the  second.  They  remind  us  of  Christiana  and 
her  children,  who  would  not  join  the  Pilgrim  when  he 
set  out  from  the  City  of  Destruction,  but  who  subse- 
quentl}^  followed  in  his  footsteps. 

But  there  was  little  at  Jerusalem  to  attract  a  new 
expedition  ;  for  the  glamour  which  had  surrounded  the 


Ezra  vii.  ii-viii.]       EZRA'S  EXPEDITION.  127 


first  return,  with  a  son  of  David  at  its  head,  had  faded 
in  grievous  disappointments  ;  and  the  second  series  of 
pilgrims  had  to  carry  with  them  the  torch  with  which 
to  rekindle  the  flames  of  devotion. 

Ezra  states  that  when  he  had  marshalled  his  forces 
he  spent  three  days  with  them  by  a  river  called  the 
"  Ahava,"  apparently  because  it  flowed  by  a  town 
of  that  name.  The  exact  site  of  the  camp  cannot  be 
determined,  although  it  could  not  have  been  far  from 
Babylon,  and  the  river  must  have  been  either  one  of 
the  tributaries  of  the  Euphrates  or  a  canal  cut  through 
its  alluvial  plain.  The  only  plausible  conjecture  of  a 
definite  site  settles  upon  a  place  now  known  as  Hit,  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  some  bitumen  springs  ;  and  the 
interest  of  this  place  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  here 
the  usual  caravan  route  leaves  the  fertile  Valley  of  the 
Euphrates  and  plunges  into  the  waterless  desert.  Even 
if  Ezra  decided  to  avoid  the  difficult  desert  track,  and 
to  take  his  heavy  caravan  round  through  Northern  Syria 
by  way  of  Aleppo  and  the  V^alley  of  the  Orontes — an 
extended  journey  which  would  account  for  the  three 
months  spent  on  the  road — it  would  still  be  natural  for 
him  to  pause  at  the  parting  of  the  ways  and  review 
the  gathered  host.  One  result  of  this  review  was  the 
startling  discovery  that  there  were  no  Levites  in  the 
whole  company.  We  were  struck  with  the  fact  that 
but  a  very  small  and  disproportionate  number  of  these 
officials  accompanied  the  earlier  pilgrimage  of  Zerubbabel, 
and  we  saw  the  probable  explanation  in  the  disappoint- 
ment if  not  the  disaffection  of  the  Levites  at  their 
degradation  by  Ezekiel.  The  more  rigid  arrangement 
of  Ezra's  edition  of  The  Law,  which  gave  them  a  definite 
and  permanent  place  in  a  second  rank,  below  the  priest- 
hood, was  not  likely  to  encourage  them  to  volunteer  for 


[28  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


the  new  expedition.  Nothing  is  more  difficult  than 
self-effacement  even  in  the  service  of  God. 

There  was  a  community  of  Levites  at  a  place  called 
Casiphia,*  under  the  direction  of  a  leader  named  Iddo. 
It  would  be  interesting  to  think  that  this  community 
was  really  a  sort  of  Levitical  college,  a  school  of  students 
of  the  Torah ;  but  v/e  have  no  data  to  go  upon  in  form- 
ing an  opinion.  One  thing  is  certain.  We  cannot 
suppose  that  the  new  edition  of  The  Law  had  been 
drawn  up  in  this  community  of  the  Levites,  because 
Ezra  had  started  with  it  in  his  hand  as  the  charter  of 
his  great  enterprise ;  nor,  indeed,  in  any  other  Levitical 
college,  because  it  was  not  at  all  according  to  the  mind 
of  the  Levites. 

After  completing  his  company  by  the  addition  of 
the  Levites,  Ezra  made  a  solemn  religious  preparation 
for  his  journey.  Like  the  Israelites  after  the  defeat  at 
Gibeah  in  their  retributive  war  with  Benjamin  ;  f  like 
the  penitent  people  at  Mizpeh,  in  the  days  of  Samuel, 
v/hen  they  put  away  their  idols  ;  |  like  Jehoshaphat  and 
his  subjects  when  rumours  of  a  threatened  invasion 
filled  them  with  apprehension,  § — Ezra  and  his  followers 
fasted  and  humbled  themselves  before  God  in  view  of 
their  hazardous  undertaking.  The  fasting  v/as  a  natural 
sign  of  the  humiliation,  and  this  prostration  before  God 
was  at  once  a  confession  of  sin  and  an  admission  of 
absolute  dependence  on  His  mercy.  Thus  the  people 
reveal  themselves  as  the  "  poor  in  spirit "  to  whom  our 
Lord  directs  His  first  beatitude.     They  are  those  who 

*  The  site  of  this  town  has  not  been  identified.     It  could  not  have 
been  far  from  Ahava. 
j  Judges  XX.  26. 
\  I  Sam.  vii.  6. 
S  2  Chron.  xx.  l. 


E/ravii.  II— viii.]  EZRA'S  EXPEDITION.  129 

humble  themselves,  and  therefore  those  whom  God  will 
exalt. 

We  must  not  confound  this  state  of  self-humiliation 
before  God  with  the  totally  different  condition  of  abject 
fear  which  shrinks  from  danger  in  contemptible 
cowardice.  The  very  opposite  to  that  is  the  attitude 
of  these  humble  pilgrims.  Like  the  Puritan  soldiers 
who  became  bold  as  Hons  before  man  in  the  day  of 
battle,  just  because  they  had  spent  the  night  in  fasting 
and  tears  and  self-abasement  before  God,  Ezra  and  his 
people  rose  from  their  penitential  fast,  calm.ly  prepared 
to  face  all  dangers  in  the  invincible  might  of  God. 
There  seems  to  have  been  some  enemy  whom  Ezra 
knew  to  be  threatening  his  path,  for  when  he  got  safely 
to  the  end  of  his  journey  he  gave  thanks  for  God's  pro- 
tection from  this  foe ;  *  and,  in  any  case,  so  v/ealthy  a 
caravan  as  his  was  v/ould  provoke  the  cupidity  of 
the  roving  hordes  of  Bedouin  that  infested  the  Syrian 
w^astes.  Ezra's  first  thought  was  to  ask  for  an  escort ; 
but  he  tells  us  that  he  was  ashamed  to  do  so,  as  this 
would  imply  distrust  in  God.f  Whatever  we  may 
think  of  his  logic,  we  must  be  struck  by  his  splendid 
faith,  and  the  loyalty  which  would  run  a  great  risk 
rather  than  suffer  what  might  seem  like  dishonour 
to  his  God.  Here  was  one  of  God's  heroes.  We 
cannot  but  connect  the  preliminary  fast  with  this 
courageous  attitude  of  Ezra's.  So  in  tales  of  chivalry 
we  read  how  knights  were  braced  by  prayer  and  fast 
and  vigil  to  enter  the  most  terrible  conflicts  with  talis- 
mans of  victory.  In  an  age  of  rushing  activity  it  is 
hard  to  find  the  hidden  springs  of  strength  in  their 
calm  retreats.     The  glare  of  publicity  starts  us  on  the 

*  Ezra  viii,  31.  f  Ezra  viii.  22. 

9 


I30  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

wrong  track,  by  tempting  us  to  advertise  our  own 
excellences,  instead  of  abasing  ourselves  in  the  dust 
before  God.  Yet  is  it  not  now  as  true  as  ever  that  no 
boasted  might  of  man  can  be  in  any  way  comparable  to 
the  Divine  strength  which  takes  possession  of  those 
who  completely  surrender  their  wills  to  God  ?  Happy 
are  they  who  have  the  grace  to  walk  in  the  valley  of 
humiHation,  for  this  leads  to  the  armoury  of  super- 
natural power ! 


CHAPTER   XII. 

FOREIGN  MARRIAGES. 
Ezra  ix. 

THE  successful  issue  of  Ezra's  undertaking  was 
speedily  followed  by  a  bitter  disappointment  on 
the  part  of  its  leader,  the  experience  of  which  urged 
him  to  make  a  drastic  reformation  that  rent  many  a 
happy  home  asunder  and  filled  Jerusalem  with  the 
grief  of  broken  hearts. 

During  the  obscure  period  that  followed  the  dedica- 
tion of  the  temple — a  period  of  which  we  have  no 
historical  remains — the  rigorous  exclusiveness  which 
had  marked  the  conduct  of  the  returned  exiles  when 
they  had  rudely  rejected  the  proposal  of  their  Gentile 
neighbours  to  assist  them  in  rebuilding  the  temple  was 
abandoned,  and  freedom  of  intercourse  went  so  far  as 
to  permit  intermarriage  with  the  descendants  of  the 
Canaanite  aborigines  and  the  heathen  population  of 
neighbouring  nations.  Ezra  gives  a  list  of  tribal  names 
closely  resembling  the  hsts  preserved  in  the  history  of 
early  ages,  when  the  Hebrews  first  contemplated  taking 
possession  of  the  promised  land ;  *  but  it  cannot  be 
imagined  that  the  ancient  tribes  preserved  their  inde- 
pendent  names  and  separate  existence  as  late  as  the 


*  Ezra  ix.  i. 

1.31 


132  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

time  of  the  return — though  the  presence  of  the  gypsies 
as  a  distinct  people  in  England  to-day  shows  that  racial 
distinction  may  be  kept  up  for  ages  in  a  mixed  society. 
It  is  more  probable  that  the  list  is  literary,  that  the 
names  are  reminiscences  of  the  tribes  as  they  were 
known  in  ancient  traditions.  In  addition  to  these  old 
inhabitants  of  Canaan,  there  are  Ammonites  and 
Moabites  from  across  the  Jordan,  Egyptians,  and, 
lastly,  most  significantly  separate  from  the  Canaanite 
tribes,  those  strange  folk,  the  Amorites,  who  are 
discovered  by  recent  ethnological  research  to  be  of 
a  totally  different  stock  from  that  of  the  Canaanite 
tribes,  probably  allied  to  a  light-coloured  people  that 
can  be  traced  along  the  Libyan  border,  and  possibly 
even  of  Aryan  origin.  From  all  these  races  the  Jews 
had  taken  them  wives.  So  wide  was  the  gate  flung 
open  ! 

This  freedom  of  intermarriage  may  be  viewed  as  a 
sign  of  general  laxity  and  indifference  on  the  part  of 
the  citizens  of  Jerusalem,  and  so  Ezra  seems  to  have 
regarded  it.  But  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  suppose  that 
there  was  no  serious  purpose  associated  with  it,  by  means 
of  which  grave  and  patriotic  men  attempted  to  justify 
the  practice.  It  was  a  question  whether  the  policy  of 
exclusiveness  had  succeeded.  The  temple  had  been 
built,  it  is  true ;  and  a  city  had  risen  among  the  ruins 
of  ancient  Jerusalem.  But  poverty,  oppression,  hard- 
ship, and  disappointment  had  settled  down  on  the  little 
Judsean  community,  which  now  found  itself  far  worse 
off  than  the  captives  in  Babylon.  Feeble  and  isolated, 
the  Jews  were  quite  unable  to  resist  the  attacks  of  their 
jealous  neighbours.  Would  it  not  be  better  to  come  to 
terms  with  them,  and  from  enemies  convert  them  into 
allies  ?      Then    the   policy   of  exclusiveness   involved 


Ezraix.]  FOREIGN  MARRIAGES.  133 


commercial  ruin  ;  and  men  who  knew  how  their  brethren 
in  Chaldaea  were  enriching  themselves  by  trade  with 
the  heathen,  were  galled  by  a  yoke  which  held  them 
back  from  foreign  intercourse.  It  would  seem  to  be 
advisable,  on  social  as  well  as  on  political  grounds,  that 
a  new  and  more  liberal  course  should  be  pursued,  if  the 
wretched  garrison  was  not  to  be  starved  out.  Leading 
aristocratic  families  were  foremost  in  contracting  the 
foreign  alliances.  It  is  such  as  they  who  would  profit 
most,  as  it  is  such  as  they  who  would  be  most  tempted 
to  consider  worldly  motives  and  to  forgo  the  austerity 
of  their  fathers.  There  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
any  one  recognised  head  of  the  community  after  Zerub- 
babel ;  the  ''  princes  "  constituted  a  sort  of  informal 
oligarchy.  Some  of  these  princes  had  taken  foreign 
wives.  Priests  and  Levites  had  also  followed  the  same 
course.  It  is  a  historical  fact  that  the  party  of  rigour 
is  not  generally  the  official  party.  In  the  days  of  our 
Lord  the  priests  and  rulers  were  mostly  Sadducean, 
while  the  Pharisees  were  men  of  the  people.  The 
English  Puritans  were  not  of  the  Court  party.  But  in 
the  case  before  us  the  leaders  of  the  people  were 
divided.  While  we  do  not  meet  any  priests  among  the 
purists,  some  of  the  princes  disapproved  of  the  laxity 
of  their  neighbours,  and  exposed  it  to  Ezra. 

Ezra  was  amazed,  appalled.  In  the  dramatic  style 
which  is  quite  natural  to  an  Oriental,  he  rent  both  his 
tunic  and  his  outer  mantle,  and  he  tore  his  hair  and 
his  long  priestly  beard.  This  expressed  more  than 
the  grief  of  mourning  which  is  shown  by  tearing  one 
garment  and  cutting  the  hair.  Like  the  high-priest 
when  he  ostentatiously  rent  his  clothes  at  what  he 
wished  to  be  regarded  as  blasphemy  in  the  words  of 
Jesus,  Ezra  showed  indignation  and  rage  by  his  violent 


134  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

action.  It  was  a  sign  of  his  startled  and  horrified 
emotions ;  but  no  doubt  it  was  also  intended  to  pro- 
duce an  impression  on  the  people  who  gathered  in  awe 
to  watch  the  great  ambassador,  as  he  sat  amazed  and 
silent  on  the  temple  pavement  through  the  long  hours 
of  the  autumn  afternoon. 

The  grounds  of  Ezra's  grief  and  anger  may  be 
learnt  from  the  remarkable  prayer  which  he  poured 
out  when  the  stir  occasioned  by  the  preparation  of  the 
vesper  ceremionies  roused  him,  and  when  the  ascending 
smoke  of  the  evening  sacrifice  would  naturally  suggest 
to  him  an  occasion  for  drawing  near  to  God.  Welling 
up,  hot  and  passionate,  his  prayer  is  a  revelation  of 
the  very  heart  of  the  scribe.  Ezra  shows  us  what 
true  prayer  is — that  it  is  laying  bare  the  heart  and  soul 
in  the  presence  of  God.  The  striking  characteristic  of 
this  outburst  of  Ezra's  is  that  it  does  not  contain  a 
single  petition.  There  is  no  greater  mistake  in  regard 
to  prayer  than  the  notion  that  it  is  nothing  more  than 
the  begging  of  specific  favours  from  the  bounty  of  the 
Almighty.  That  is  but  a  shallow  kind  of  prayer  at 
best.  In  the  deepest  and  most  real  prayer  the  soul  is 
too  near  to  God  to  ask  for  any  definite  thing ;  it  is  just 
unbosoming  itself  to  the  Great  Confidant,  just  telling 
out  its  agony  to  the  Father  who  can  understand  every- 
thing and  receive  the  whole  burden  of  the  anguished 
spirit. 

Considering  this  prayer  more  in  detail,  we  may 
notice,  in  the  first  place,  that  Ezra  comes  out  as  a 
true  priest,  not  indeed  officiating  at  the  altar  with 
ceremonial  sacrifices,  but  identifying  himself  with  the 
people  he  represents,  so  that  he  takes  to  his  own  breast 
the  shame  of  what  he  regards  as  the  sin  of  his 
people.     Prostrate  with  self-humiUation,  he  cries,  ''O 


Ezra  ix.]  FOREIGN  MARRIAGES.  135 

my   God,    I    am   ashamed    and   blush    to    lift   up   my 
face  to  Thee,  my  God,"  *  and  he  speaks  of  the  sins 
which  have  just  been  made  known  to  him  as  though 
he  had  a  share  in  them,  calling  them  ^^  our  iniquities" 
and   ''o/^r  trespass."  t     Have  we  not  here  a  gUmpse 
into  that   mystery  of  vicarious    sin-bearing    which   is 
consummated    in  the  great    intercession   and   sacrifice 
of  our   Lord  ?      Though    himself  a    sinful    man,    and 
therefore  at  heart  sharing  the  guilt  of  his  people  by 
personal   participation  in  it,  as   the  holy  Jesus   could 
not  do,  still  in  regard  to  the  particular  offence  which  he 
is  now  deploring,  Ezra  is  as  innocent  as  an  unfallen 
angel.     Yet  he  blushes   for  shame,  and   lies  prostrate 
with    confusion    of  face.     He   is  such    a    true    patriot 
that  he  completely  identifies  himself  with  his  people. 
But   in  proportion    as    such    an    identification    is    felt, 
there  must  be    an    involuntary  sense    of  the    sharing 
of  guilt.       It   is    vain    to    call    it    an    illusion    of  the 
imagination.      Before    the    bar    of  strict   justice    Ezra 
was  as  innocent  of  this  one  sin,  as  before  the  same  bar 
Christ  was  innocent  of  all  sin.     God  could  not  really 
disapprove  of  him  for  it,  any  more  than  He  could  look 
with   disfavour  on  the  great  vSin-bearer.     But  subjec- 
tively, in   his  own  experience,  Ezra  did  not   feel   less 
poignant  pangs  of  remorse  than  he  would  have  felt  if  he 
had  been  himself  personally  guilty.     This  perfect  sym- 
pathy   of  true    priesthood    is  rarely  experienced ;  but 
since  Christians  are  called  to  be  priests,  to  make  inter- 
cession, and  to  bear  one  another's  burdens,  something 
approaching  it  must  be  shared  by  all  the  followers  of 
Christ ;  they  who  would  go  forth  as  saviours  of  their 
brethren  must  feel  it  acutely.    The  sin-bearing  sacrifice 


*  Ezra  ix.  6.  t  ^^'^- 


136  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

of  Christ  stands  alone  in  its  perfect  efficacy,  and  many 
mysteries  crowd  about  it  that  cannot  be  explained  by 
any  human  analogies.  Still  here  and  there  we  come 
across  faint  likenesses  in  the  higher  experiences  of  the 
better  men,  enough  to  suggest  that  our  Lord's  passion 
was  not  a  prodigy,  that  it  was  really  in  harmony  with 
the  laws  by  which  God  governs  the  moral  universe. 

In  thus  confessing  the  sin  of  the  people  before  God, 
but  in  language  which  the  people  who  shared  with  him 
a  reverence  for  The  Law  could  hear,  no  doubt  Ezra 
hoped  to  move  them  also  to  share  in  his  feelings  of 
shame  and  abhorrence  for  the  practices  he  was  de- 
ploring.  He  came  dangerously  near  to  the  fatal  mis- 
take of  preaching  through  a  prayer,  by  '*  praying  at  " 
the  congregation.  He  was  evidently  too  deeply  moved 
to  be  guilty  of  an  insincerity,  a  piece  of  profanity,  at 
which  every  devout  soul  must  revolt.  Nevertheless 
the  very  exercise  of  public  prayer — prayer  uttered 
audibly,  and  conducted  by  the  leader  of  a  congregation 
— means  that  this  is  to  be  an  inducement  for  the  people 
to  join  in  the  worship.  The  officiating  minister  is  not 
merely  to  pray  before  the  congregation,  while  the 
people  kneel  as  silent  auditors.  His  prayer  is  de- 
signed to  guide  and  help  their  prayers,  so  that  there 
may  be  ''  common  prayer "  throughout  the  whole 
assembly.  In  this  way  it  may  be  possible  for  him 
to  influence  men  and  women  by  praying  with  them,  as 
he  can  never  do  by  directly  preaching  to  them.  The 
essential  point  is  that  the  prayer  must  first  of  all  be 
real  on  the  part  of  the  leader — that  he  must  be  truly 
addressing  God,  and  then  that  his  intention  with  regard 
to  the  people  must  be  not  to  exhort  them  through  his 
prayer,  but  simply  to  induce  them  to  join  him  in  it. 

Let  us  now  inquire  what  was  the  nature  of  the  sin 


Ezra  ix.]  FOREIGN  MARRIAGES.  137 

which  so  grievously  distressed  Ezra,  and  which  he 
regarded  as  so  heavy  a  slur  on  the  character  of  his 
people  in  the  sight  of  God.  On  the  surface  of  it,  there 
was  just  a  question  of  policy.  Some  have  argued  that 
the  party  of  rigour  was  mistaken,  that  its  course  was 
suicidal,  that  the  only  way  of  preserving  the  little 
colony  was  by  means  of  well-adjusted  alliances  with 
its  neighbours — a  low  view  of  the  question  which  Ezra 
would  not  have  glanced  at  for  a  moment,  because  with 
his  supreme  faith  in  God  no  consideration  of  worldly 
expediency  or  political  diplomacy  could  be  allowed  to 
deflect  him  from  the  path  indicated,  as  he  thought,  by 
the  Divine  will.  But  a  higher  line  of  opposition  has 
been  taken.  It  has  been  said  that  Ezra  was  illiberal, 
uncharitable,  culpably  narrow,  and  heartlessly  harsh. 
That  the  man  who  could  pour  forth  such  a  prayer  as 
this,  every  sentence  of  which  throbs  with  emotion, 
every  word  of  which  tingles  with  intense  feeling — that 
this  man  was  heartless  cannot  be  believed.  Still  it 
may  be  urged  that  Ezra  took  a  very  different  view  from 
that  suggested  by  the  genial  outlook  across  the  nations 
which  we  meet  in  Isaiah.  The  lovely  idyll  of  Ruth 
defends  the  course  he  condemned  so  unsparingly.  The 
Book  of  Jonah  was  written  directly  in  rebuke  of  one 
form  of  Jewish  exclusiveness.  Ezra  was  going  even 
further  than  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  which  had 
allowed  marriages  with  the  heathen,*  and  had  laid 
down  definite  marriage  laws  in  regard  to  foreign  con- 
nections, f  It  cannot  be  maintained  that  all  the  races 
named  by  Ezra  were  excluded.  Could  it  be  just  to 
condemn  the  Jews  for  not  having  followed  the  later 
and  more  exacting  edition  of  The  Law,  which  Ezra  had 


*  Deut.  xxi.  13.  t  Dcut.  xxiii,  I-S. 


138  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


only  just  brought  up  with  him,  and  which  had  not  been 
known  by  the  offenders  ? 

In  trying  to  answer  these  questions,  we  must  start 
from  one  clear  fact.  Ezra  is  not  merely  guided  by  a 
certain  view  of  policy.  He  may  be  mistaken,  but  he  is 
deeply  conscientious,  his  motive  is  intensely  religious. 
Whether  rightly  or  v/rongly,  he  is  quite  persuaded 
that  the  social  condition  at  which  he  is  so  grievously 
shocked  is  directly  opposed  to  the  known  will  of  God. 
"We  have  forsaken  Thy  commandments,"  he  exclaims. 
But  what  commandments,  we  may  ask,  seeing  that  the 
people  of  Jerusalem  did  not  possess  a  law  that  went  so 
far  as  Ezra  was  requiring  of  them  ?  His  own  language 
here  comes  in  most  appositely.  Ezra  does  not  appeal 
to  Deuteronomy,  though  he  may  have  had  a  passage 
from  that  book  in  mind,*  neither  does  he  produce  the 
Law  Book  which  he  has  brought  up  with  him  from 
Bab^'lon  and  to  v/hich  reference  is  made  in  our  version 
of  the  decree  of  Artaxerxes ;  f  but  he  turns  to  the 
prophets,  not  with  reference  to  any  of  their  specific 
utterances,  but  in  the  most  general  way,  implying  that 
his  view  is  derived  from  the  broad  stream  of  prophecy 
in  its  whole  course  and  character.  In  his  prayer  he 
describes  the  broken  commandments  as  ''  those  which 
Thou  hast  commanded  by  Thy  servants  the  prophets." 
This  is  the  more  remarkable  because  the  prophets  did 
not  favour  the  scrupulous  observance  of  external  rules, 
but  dwelt  on  great  principles  of  righteousness.  Some 
of  them  took  the  liberal  side,  and  expressed  decidedly 
cosmopolitan  ideas  in  regard  to  foreign  nations,  as 
Ezra  must  have  been  aware.  He  may  have  mentally 
anticipated    the    excuses    which    would    be    urged    in 

*  Deut.  vii.  3.  y  Ezra  vii.  14. 


Ezra  ix.]  FOREIGN  MARRIAGES.  139 

reliance  on  isolated  utterances  of  this  character.  Still, 
on  a  survey  of  the  whole  course  of  prophecy,  he  is 
persuaded  that  it  is  opposed  to  the  practices  which 
he  condemns.  He  throws  his  conclusion  into  a 
definite  sentence,  after  the  manner  of  a  verbal  quota- 
tion,* but  this  is  only  in  accordance  with  the  vivid, 
dramatic  style  of  Semitic  literature,  and  what  he  really 
means  is  that  the  spirit  of  his  national  prophecy  and  the 
principles  laid  down  by  the  recognised  prophets  support 
him  in  the  position  which  he  has  taken  up.  These 
prophets  fought  against  all  corrupt  practices,  and  in 
particular  they  waged  ceaseless  war  with  the  introduction 
of  heathenish  manners  to  the  religious  and  social  life  of 
Israel.  It  is  here  that  Ezra  finds  them  to  be  powerful 
allies  in  his  stern  reformation.  They  furnish  him,  so 
to  speak,  with  his  major  premiss,  and  that  is  indis- 
putable. His  weak  place  is  in  his  minor  premiss,  viz., 
in  the  notion  that  intermarriage  with  Gentile  neigh- 
bours necessarily  involves  the  introduction  of  corrupt 
heathenish  habits.  This  he  quietly  assumes.  But 
there  is  much  to  be  said  for  his  position,  especially 
when  we  note  that  he  is  not  now  concerned  with  the 
Samaritans,  with  whom  the  temple-builders  came  into 
contact  and  who  accepted  some  measure  of  the  Jewish 
faith,  but  in  some  cases  with  known  idolaters — the 
Egyptians  for  instance.  The  complex  social  and  moral 
problems  which  surround  the  quarrel  on  which  Ezra 
here  embarks  will  come  before  us  more  fully  as  we 
proceed.  At  present  it  may  suffice  for  us  to  see  that 
Ezra  rests  his  action  on  his  conception  of  the  main 
characteristics  of  the  teaching  of  the  prophets. 

Further,  his  reading   of  history  comes   to  his  aid. 


*  Ezra  ix.  ii, 


140  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

He  perceives  that  it  was  the  adoption  of  heathenish 
practices  that  necessitated  the  severe  chastisement  of 
the  captivity.  God  had  only  spared  a  small  remnant 
of  the  guilty  people.  But  He  had  been  very  gracious 
to  that  remnant,  giving  them  ^^  a  nail  in  His  holy 
place " ;  *  i.e.,  a  fixture  in  the  restored  sanctuary, 
though  as  yet,  as  it  were,  but  at  one  small  point,  because 
so  few  had  returned  to  enjoy  the  privileges  of  the 
sacred  temple  worship.  Now  even  this  nail  might 
be  drawn.  Will  the  escaped  remnant  be  so  foolish  as 
to  imitate  the  sins  of  their  forefathers,  and  risk  the 
slight  hold  which  they  have  as  yet  obtained  in  the 
renewed  centre  of  Divine  favour  ?  So  to  repudiate  the 
lessons  of  the  captivity,  which  should  have  been 
branded  irrevocably  by  the  hot  irons  of  its  cruel 
^hardships,  what  was  this  but  a  sign  of  the  most 
desperate  depravity  ?  Ezra  could  see  no  hope  even 
of  a  remnant  escaping  from  the  wrath  which  would 
consume  the  people  who  were  guilty  of  such  wilful, 
such  open-eyed  apostasy. 

In  the  concluding  sentences  of  his  prayer  Ezra 
appeals  to  the  righteousness  of  God,  who  had  permitted 
the  remnant  to  escape  at  the  time  of  the  Babylonian 
Captivity,  saying,  "  O  Lord,  the  God  of  Israel,  Thou  art 
righteous ;  for  we  are  left  a  remnant  that  is  escaped, 
as  it  is  this  day."t  Some  have  supposed  that  God's 
righteousness  here  stands  for  His  goodness,  and  that 
Ezra  really  means  the  mercy  which  spared  the  remnant. 
But  this  interpretation  is  contrary  to  usage,  and  quite 
opposed  to  the  spirit  of  the  prayer.  Ezra  has  referred 
to  the  mercy  of  God  earlier,  but  in  his  final  sentences  he 
has  another  thought  in  mind.     The  prayer  ends  in  gloom 

*  Ezra  ix.  8.  f  Ezra  ix.  15. 


Ezraix.]  FOREIGN  MARRIAGES.  141 

and  despondency — "behold,  we  are  before  Thee  in  our 
guiltiness ;  for  none  can  stand  before  Thee  because 
of  this."  *  The  righteousness  of  God,  then,  is  seen  in 
the  fact  that  only  a  remnant  was  spared.  Ezra  does 
not  plead  for  the  pardon  of  the  guilty  people,  as  Moses 
did  in  his  famous  prayer  of  intercession.!  As  yet 
they  are  not  conscious  of  their  sin.  To  forgive  them 
before  they  have  owned  their*  guilt  would  be  immoral. 
The  first  condition  of  pardon  is  confession.  "  If  we 
con/ess  our  sins.  He  is  faithful  and  righteous  to  forgive  us 
our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteousness."  J 
Then,  indeed,  the  very  righteousness  of  God  favours 
the  pardon  of  the  sinner.  But  till  this  state  of  con- 
trition is  reached,  not  only  can  there  be  no  thought  of 
forgiveness,  but  the  sternest,  darkest  thoughts  of  sin 
are  most  right  and  fitting.  Ezra  is  far  too  much  in 
earnest  simply  to  wish  to  help  his  people  to  escape 
from  the  consequences  of  their  conduct.  This  would 
not  be  salvation.  It  would  be  moral  shipwreck.  The 
great  need  is  to  be  saved  from  the  evil  conduct  itself. 
It  is  to  this  end  that  the  very  passion  of  his  soul  is 
directed.  Here  we  perceive  the  spirit  of  the  true 
reformer.  But  the  evangelist  cannot  afford  to  dispense 
with  something  of  the  same  spirit,  although  he  can  add 
the  gracious  encouragements  of  a  gospel ;  for  the  only 
true  gospel  premises  deliverance  from  sin  itself  in  the 
first  instance  as  from  the  greatest  of  all  evils,  and 
deliverance  from  no  other  evil  except  on  condition  of 
freedom  from  this. 

*  Ezra  ix.  15.  f  Exod.  xxxii.  31,  32.  J   i  John  i.  9. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  HOME  SACRIFICED   TO   THE   CHURCH. 

Ezra  x. 

EZRA'S  narrative,  written  in  the  first  person,  ceases 
with  his  prayer,  the  conclusion  of  which  brings 
us  to  the  end  of  the  ninth  chapter  of  our  Book  of 
Ezra ;  at  the  tenth  chapter  the  chronicler  resumes 
his  story,  describing,  however,  the  events  which  im- 
mediately follow.  His  writing  is  here  as  graphic  as 
Ezra's,  and  if  it  is  not  taken  from  notes  left  by  the 
scribe,  at  all  events  it  would  seem  to  be  drawn  from 
the  report  of  another  eye-witness  ;  for  it  describes  most 
remarkable  scenes  with  a  vividness  that  brings  them 
before  the  mind's  eye,  so  that  the  reader  cannot  study 
them  even  at  this  late  day  without  a  pang  of  sympathy. 
Ezra's  prayer  and  confession,  his  grievous  weeping 
and  prostrate  humiliation  before  God,  deeply  affected  the 
spectators ;  and  as  the  news  spread  through  the  city, 
a  very  great  congregation  of  men,  women,  and  children 
assembled  together  to  gaze  at  the  strange  spectacle. 
They  could  not  gaze  unmoved.  Deep  emotion  is  con- 
tagious. The  man  who  is  himself  profoundly  convinced 
and  intensely  concerned  with  his  religious  ideas  will 
certainly  win  disciples.  Where  the  soundest  arguments 
have  failed  to  persuade,  a  single  note  of  sincere  faith 
often  strikes  home.     It  is  the  passion  of  the  orator  that 


Ezra  X.]    THE  HOME  SACRIFICED  TO  THE  CHURCH.      143 


rouses  the  multitude,  and  even  where  there  is  no  oratory 
the  passion  of  true  feeHng  pleads  with  irresistible  elo- 
quence. Ezra  had  not  to  speak  a  word  to  the  people. 
What  he  was,  what  he  felt,  his  agony  of  shame,  his 
agony  of  prayer — all  this  melted  them  to  tears,  and  a  cry 
of  lamentation  went  up  from  the  gathered  multitudes  in 
the  temple  courts.  Their  grief  was  more  than  a  senti- 
mental reflection  of  the  scribe's  distress,  for  the  Jews 
could  see  plainly  that  it  was  for  them  and  for  their 
miserable  condition  that  this  ambassador  from  the 
Persian  court  was  mourning  so  piteously.  His  sorrow 
was  wholly  vicarious.  By  no  calamity  or  offence  of  his 
own,  but  simply  by  what  he  regarded  as  their  wretched 
fall,  Ezra  was  now  plunged  into  heart-broken  agony. 
Such  a  result  of  their  conduct  could  not  but  excite  the 
keenest  self-reproaches  in  the  breasts  of  all  who  in  any 
degree  shared  his  view  of  the  situation.  Then  the  only 
path  of  amendment  visible  before  them  was  one  that 
involved  the  violent  rupture  of  home  ties;  the  cruel 
severance  of  husband  and  wife,  of  parent  and  child  ; 
the  complete  sacrifice  of  human  love  on  what  appeared 
to  be  the  altar  of  duty  to  God.  It  was  indeed  a  bitter 
hour  for  the  Jews  who  felt  themselves  to  be  offenders, 
and  for  their  innocent  wives  and  children  who  would 
be  involved  in  any  attempted  reformation. 

The  confusion  was  arrested  by  the  voice  of  one  man,  a 
layman  named  Shecaniah  the  son  of  Jehiel,  who  came 
to  the  assistance  of  Ezra  as  a  volunteer  spokesman  of 
the  people.  This  man  entirely  surrendered  to  Ezra's 
view,  making  a  frank  and  unreserved  confession  of  his 
own  and  the  people's  sin.  So  far  then  Ezra  has  won 
his  point.  He  has  begun  to  gain  assent  from  among 
the  offenders.  Shecaniah  adds  to  his  confession  a 
sentence  of  some  ambiguity,  saying,  ^'  Yet  now  there  is 


144  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER, 


hope  for  Israel  concerning  this  thing."  *  This  might  be 
thought  to  mean  that  God  was  merciful,  and  that  there 
was  hope  in  the  penitent  attitude  of  the  congregation 
that  He  would  take  pity  on  the  people  and  not  deal 
hardly  with  them.  But  the  similarity  of  the  phraseology 
to  the  words  of  the  last  verse  of  the  previous  chapter, 
where  the  expression  "  because  of  this "  f  plainly 
points  to  the  offence  as  the  one  thing  in  view,  shows 
that  the  allusion  here  is  to  that  offence,  and  not  to  the 
more  recent  signs  of  penitence.  Shecaniah  means, 
then,  that  there  is  hope  concerning  this  matter  of  the 
foreign  marriages — viz.,  that  they  may  be  rooted  out 
of  Israel.  The  hope  is  for  a  reformation,  not  for  any 
condoning  of  the  offence.  It  means  despair  to  the 
unhappy  wives,  the  end  of  all  home  peace  and  joy  in 
many  a  household — a  lurid  hope  surely,  and  hardly 
worthy  of  the  name  except  on  the  Hps  of  a  fanatic. 
Shecaniah  now  proceeds  to  make  a  definite  proposal. 
He  would  have  the  people  enter  into  a  solemn  covenant 
wdth  God.  They  are  not  only  to  undergo  a  great 
domestic  reformation,  but  they  are  to  take  a  vow  in 
the  sight  of  God  that  they  will  carry  it  through. 
Shecaniah  shows  the  unreflecting  zeal  of  a  raw  con- 
vert ;  an  officious  person,  a  meddler,  he  is  too  bold  and 
forward  for  one  w^hose  place  is  the  penitent's  bench. 
The  covenant  is  to  pledge  the  people  to  divorce  their 
foreign  wives.  Yet  the  unfeehng  man  v/ill  not  soften 
his  proposal  by  any  euphemism,  nor  will  he  hide  its 
more  odious  features.  He  deliberately  adds  that  the 
children  should  be  sent  away  with  their  mothers.  The 
nests  are  to  be  cleared  of  the  whole  brood. 

Ezra   had  not  ventured  to  draw  out  such  a  direful 


*  Ezra  X.  2.  t  Ezra  ix.  15. 


Ezrax.]    THE  HOME  SACRIFICED  TO  THE  CHURCH.      145 

programme.  But  Shecaniah  says  that  this  is  ^'accord- 
ing to  the  counsel  of  my  lord,"  *  using  terms  of  un- 
wonted obsequiousness— unless,  as  seems  less  likely, 
the  phrase  is  meant  to  apply  to  God,  i.e.,  to  be  read, 
"According  to  the  counsel  of  The  Lordy  Shecaniah 
evidently  gathered  the  unexpressed  opinion  of  Ezra  from 
the  language  of  his  prayer  and  from  his  general 
attitude.  This  was  the  only  way  out  of  the  difficulty, 
the  logical  conclusion  from  what  was  now  admitted. 
Ezra  saw  it  clearly  enough,  but  it  wanted  a  man  of 
coarser  fibre  to  say  it.  Shecaniah  goes  further,  and 
claims  the  concurrence  of  all  who  *'  tremble  at  the 
words  of  the  God  of  Israel."  These  people  have  been 
mentioned  before  as  forming  the  nucleus  of  the  congre- 
gation that  gathered  about  Ezra.f  Then  this  outspoken 
man  distinctly  claims  the  authority  of  The  Law  for  his 
proposition.  Ezra  had  based  his  view  of  the  heathen 
marriages  on  the  general  character  of  the  teaching  of 
the  prophets;  Shecaniah  now  appeals  to  The  Law 
as  the  authority  for  his  scheme  of  wholesale  divorce. 
This  is  a  huge  assumption  of  what  has  never  been 
demonstrated.  But  such  people  as  Shecaniah  do  not 
wait  for  niceties  of  proof  before  making  their  sweeping 
proposals. 

The  bold  adviser  followed  up  his  suggestion  by  rally- 
ing Ezra  and  calling  upon  him  to  "  be  of  good  courage," 
seeing  that  he  would  have  supporters  in  the  great 
reformation.  Falling  in  with  the  proposed  scheme, 
Ezra  there  and  then  extracted  an  oath  from  the  people 
— both  clergy  and  laity — that  they  would  execute  it. 
This  was  a  general  resolution.  Some  time  was  required 
and  many  difficulties  had   to  be  faced  before  it  could 


t  Ezra  ix.  4. 

10 


146  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


be  carried  into  practice,  and  meanwhile  Ezra  withdrew 
into  retirement,  still  fasting  and  mourning. 

We  must  now  allow  for  an  interval  of  some  months. 
The  chronological  arrangement  seems  to  have  been  as 
follows.  Ezra  and  his  company  left  Babylon  in  the 
spring,  as  Zerubbabel  had  done  before  him — at  the  same 
season  as  that  of  the  great  exodus  from  Egypt  under 
Moses.  Each  of  these  three  great  expeditions  began 
with  the  opening  of  the  natural  year,  in  scenes  of  bright 
beauty  and  hopefulness.  Occupying  four  months  on 
his  journey,  Ezra  reached  Jerusalem  in  the  heat  of 
July.  It  could  not  have  been  very  long  after  his  arrival 
that  the  news  of  the  foreign  marriages  was  brought  to 
him  by  the  princes,  because  if  he  had  spent  any  con- 
siderable time  in  Jerusalem  first  he  must  have  found  out 
the  state  of  affairs  for  himself  But  now  we  are  trans- 
ported to  the  month  of  December  for  the  meeting  of 
the  people  when  the  covenant  of  divorce  is  to  be  put 
in  force.  Possibly  some  of  the  powerful  leaders  had 
opposed  the  summoning  of  such  a  gathering,  and  their 
hindrance  may  have  delayed  it ;  or  it  may  have  taken 
Ezra  and  his  counsellors  some  time  to  mature  their 
plans.  Long  brooding  over  the  question  could  not 
have  lessened  the  scribe's  estimate  of  its  gravity.  But 
the  suggestion  of  all  kinds  of  difficulties  and  the  clear 
perception  of  the  terrible  results  which  must  flow  from 
the  contemplated  reformation  did  not  touch  his  opinion 
of  what  was  right,  or  his  decision,  once  reached,  that 
there  must  be  a  clearing  away  of  the  foreign  elements, 
root  and  branch,  although  they  had  entwined  their 
tendrils  about  the  deepest  affections  of  the  people.  The 
seclusion  and  mourning  of  Ezra  is  recorded  in  Ezra  x.  6. 
The  next  verse  carries  us  on  to  the  preparation  for  the 
dreadful  assembly,  which,  as  we  must  conclude,  really 


Ezra  X.]    THE  HOME  SACRIFICED  TO  THE  CHURCH.      147 

took  place  some  months  later.  The  summons  was  backed 
up  by  threats  of  confiscation  and  excommunication. 
To  this  extent  the  great  powers  entrusted  to  Ezra  by 
the  king  of  Persia  were  employed.  It  looks  as  if  the 
order  was  the  issue  of  a  conflict  of  counsels  in  which 
that  of  Ezra  was  victorious,  for  it  was  exceedingly  per- 
emptory in  tone  and  it  only  gave  three  days'  notice. 
The  people  came,  as  they  were  bound  to  do,  for  the 
authority  of  the  supreme  government  was  behind  the 
summons ;  but  they  resented  the  haste  with  which  they 
had  been  called  together,  and  they  pleaded  the  incon- 
venience of  the  season  for  an  open-air  meeting.  They 
met  in  the  midst  of  the  winter  rains ;  cold  and  wet  they 
crouched  in  the  temple  courts,  the  picture  of  wretched- 
ness. In  a  hot,  dry  country  so  little  provision  is 
made  for  inclement  weather,  that  when  it  comes  the 
people  suffer  from  it  most  acutely,  so  that  it  means 
much  more  distress  to  them  than  to  the  inhabitants 
of  a  chill  and  rainy  climate.  Still  it  may  seem  strange 
that,  with  so  terrible  a  question  as  the  complete 
break-up  of  their  homes  presented  to  them,  the  Jews 
should  have  taken  much  account  of  the  mere  weather 
even  at  its  worst.  History,  however,  does  not  shape 
itself  according  to  proportionate  proprieties,  but  after  the 
course  of  very  human  facts.  We  are  often  unduly  in- 
fluenced by  present  circumstances,  so  that  what  is  small 
in  itself,  and  in  comparison  with  the  supreme  interests 
of  life,  may  become  for  the  moment  of  the  most  pressing 
importance,  just  because  it  is  present  and  making  itself 
felt  as  the  nearest  fact.  Moreover,  there  is  a  sort  of 
magnetic  connection  between  the  external  character  of 
things  and  the  most  intangible  of  internal  experiences. 
The  "  November  gloom  "  is  more  than  a  meteorological 
fact ;  it  has  its  psychological  aspect.     After  all,  are  we 


148  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND   ESTHER. 

not  citizens  of  the  great  physical  universe  ?  and  is  it 
not  therefore  reasonable  that  the  various  phases  of 
nature  should  affect  us  in  some  degree,  so  that  the 
common  topic  of  conversation,  ''the  weather,"  may  really 
be  of  more  serious  concern  than  we  suspect  ?  Be  that 
as  it  may,  it  is  clear  that  while  these  Jews,  who  usually 
enjoyed  brilliant  sunshine  and  the  fair  blue  Syrian 
sky,  were  shivering  in  the  chill  December  rains,  wet  and 
miserable,  they  were  quite  unable  to  discuss  a  great 
social  question,  or  to  brace  themselves  up  for  an  act  of 
supreme  renunciation.  It  was  a  season  of  depression, 
and  the  people  felt  limp  and  heartless,  as  people  often 
do  feel  at  such  a  season.  They  pleaded  for  delay.  Not 
only  was  the  weather  a  great  hindrance  to  calm  delibera- 
tion, but,  as  they  said,  the  proposed  reformation  was  of 
a  widespread  character.  It  must  be  an  affair  of  some 
time.  Let  it  be  regularly  organised.  Let  it  be  con- 
ducted only  before  appointed  courts  in  the  several  cities. 
This  was  reasonable  enough,  and  accordingly  it  was 
decided  to  adopt  the  suggestion.  It  is  easy  to  be  a 
reformer  in  theory ;  but  they  who  have  faced  a  great 
abuse  in  practice  know  how  difficult  it  is  to  uproot  it. 
This  is  especially  true  of  all  attempts  to  affect  the 
social  order.  Wild  ideas  are  floated  without  an  effort. 
But  the  execution  of  these  ideas  means  far  more  toil 
and  battle,  and  involves  a  much  greater  tumult  in  the 
world,  than  the  airy  dreamers  who  start  them  so  con- 
fidently and  who  are  so  surprised  at  the  slowness  of 
dull  people  to  accept  them  ever  imagine. 

Not  only  was  there  a  successful  plea  for  delay. 
There  was  also  direct  opposition  to  Ezra's  stern  proposal 
—although  this  did  not  prove  to  be  successful.  The 
indication  of  opposition  is  obscured  by  the  imperfect 
rendering  of  the  Authorised  Version.     Turning  to  the 


Ezra  X.]    THE  HOME  SACRIFICED  TO  THE  CHURCH.      149 

more  correct  translation  in  the  Revised  Version  we  read, 
''  Only  Jonathan  the  son  of  Asahel  and  Jahzeiah  the 
son  of  Tikvah  stood  up  against  this  matter :  and 
Meshullam  and  Shabbethai  the  Levite  helped  them."  * 
Here  was  a  little  knot  of  champions  of  the  poor  threat- 
ened wives,  defenders  of  the  peaceful  homes  so  soon  to 
be  smitten  by  the  ruthless  axe  of  the  reformer,  men  who 
believed  in  the  sanctity  of  domestic  life  as  not  less  real 
than  the  sanctity  of  ecclesiastical  arrangements,  men 
perhaps  to  whom  love  was  as  Divine  as  law,  nay,  was 
law,  wherever  it  was  pure  and  true. 

This  opposition  was  borne  down  ;  the  courts  sat ; 
the  divorces  were  granted  ;  wives  were  torn  from  their 
husbands  and  sent  back  to  their  indignant  parents;  and 
children  were  orphaned.  Priests,  Levites,  and  other 
temple  officers  did  not  escape  the  domestic  reformation  ; 
the  common  people  were  not  beneath  its  searching 
scrutiny  ;  everywhere  the  pruning  knife  lopped  off  the 
alien  branches  from  the  vine  of  Israel.  After  giving  a 
list  of  families  involved,  the  chronicler  concludes  with 
the  bare  remark  that  men  put  away  wives  witJi  children 
as  well  as  those  who  had  no  children. f  It  is  baldly 
stated.  What  did  it  mean  ?  The  agony  of  separation, 
the  lifelong  division  of  the  family,  the  wife  worse  than 
widowed,  the  children  driven  from  the  shelter  of  the 
home,  the  husband  sitting  desolate  in  his  silent  house 
—  over  all  this  the  chronicler  draws  a  veil  ;  but  our 
imaginations  can  picture  such  scenes  as  might  furnish 
materials  for  the  most  pathetic  tragedies. 

In  order  to  mitigate  the  misery  of  this  social  revolu- 
tion, attention  has  been  called  to  the  freedom  of  divorce 
which  was  allowed  among  the  Jews  and  to  the  inferior 

*  Ezra  X.  15.  f  Ezra  x.  44. 


I50  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

status  assigned  to  women  in  the  East.  The  wife,  it  is 
said,  was  always  prepared  to  receive  a  bill  of  divorce 
whenever  her  husband  .  found  occasion  to  dismiss 
her :  she  would  have  a  right  to  claim  back  her 
dowry ;  and  she  would  return  to  her  father's  house 
without  the  slightest  slur  upon  her  character.  All 
this  may  be  true  enough  ;  and  yet  human  nature  is  the 
same  all  the  world  over,  and  where  there  is  the  strong 
mutual  affection  of  true  wedded  love,  whether  in  the 
England  of  our  Christian  era  or  in  the  Palestine  of  the 
olden  times,  to  sever  the  tie  of  union  must  mean  the 
agony  of  torn  hearts,  the  despair  of  blighted  lives.  And 
was  this  necessary  ?  Even  if  it  was  not  according  to 
the  ordinance  of  their  religion  for  Jews  to  contract 
marriages  with  foreigners,  having  contracted  such 
marriages  and  having  seen  children  grow  up  about 
them,  was  it  not  a  worse  evil  for  them  to  break  the 
bonds  by  violence  and  scatter  the  families  ?  Is  not  the 
marriage  law  itself  holy  ?  Nay,  has  it  not  a  prior 
right  over  against  Levitical  institutions  or  prophetic 
ordinances,  seeing  that  it  may  be  traced  back  to  the 
sweet  sanctities  of  Eden  ?  What  if  the  stern  reformer 
had  fallen  into  a  dreadful  blunder  ?  Might  it  not  be 
that  this  new  Hildebrand  and  his  fanatical  followers 
were  even  guilty  of  a  huge  crime  in  their  quixotic 
attempt  to  purge  the  Church  by  wrecking  the  home  ? 

Assuredly  from  our  point  of  view  and  with  our 
Christian  light  no  such  conduct  as  theirs  could  be  con- 
doned. It  was  utterly  undiscriminating,  riding  rough- 
shod over  the  tenderest  claims.  Gentile  wives  such  as 
Ruth  the  Moabitess  might  have  adopted  the  faith  of 
their  husbands — doubtless  in  many  cases  they  had 
done  so — yet  the  sweeping,  pitiless  mandate  of  separa- 
tion applied    to    them  as  surely  as  if  they  had  been 


Ezra  X.]    THE  HOME  SACRIFICED  TO  THE  CHURCH.       151 

heathen  sorceresses.  On  the  other  hand,  we  must  use 
some  historical  imagination  in  estimating  these  sorrow- 
ful scenes.  The  great  idea  of  Ezra  was  to  preserve  a 
separate  people.  He  held  that  this  was  essential  to  the 
maintenance  of  pure  religion  and  morals  in  the  midst 
of  the  pagan  abominations  which  surrounded  the  little 
colony.  Church  separation  seemed  to  be  bound  up  with 
race  separation.  This  Ezra  believed  to  be  after  the 
mind  of  the  prophets,  and  therefore  a  truth  of  Divine 
.inspiration.  Under  all  the  circumstances  it  is  not  easy 
to  say  that  his  main  contention  was  wrong,  that  Israel 
could  have  been  preserved  as  a  Church  if  it  had  ceased 
to  keep  itself  separate  as  a  race,  or  that  without  Church 
exclusiveness  religious  purity  could  have  been  main- 
tained. 

We  are  not  called  upon  to  face  any  such  terrible 
problem,  although  St.  Paul's  warning  against  Christians 
becoming  ''  unequally  yoked  with  unbelievers  "  *  re- 
minds us  that  the  worst  ill-assortment  in  marriage 
should  not  be  thought  of  as  only  concerned  with  diver- 
sity of  rank,  wealth,  or  culture ;  that  they  are  most 
ill-matched  who  have  not  common  interests  in  the 
deepest  concerns  of  the  soul.  Then,  too,  it  needs  to  be 
remembered  in  these  days,  when  ease  and  comfort  are 
unduly  prized,  that  there  are  occasions  on  which  even 
the  peace  and  love  of  the  home  must  be  sacrificed 
to  the  supreme  claims  of  God.  Our  Lord  ominously 
warned  His  disciples  that  He  would  send  a  sword  to 
sever  the  closest  domestic  ties — *'  to  set  a  man  at  vari- 
ance against  his  father,  and  the  daughter  against  her 
mother,"  etc.,t  and  He  added,  "  He  that  loveth  father 
or  mother  more  than  Me  is  not  worthy  of  Me."  J     In 

*  2  Cor.  vi.  14.  -j-  Matt,  x,  35.  %  ^^^^^-  ^-  37 


[52  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


times  of  early  Christian  persecution  it  was  necessary 
to  choose  between  the  cross  of  Christ  and  the  nearest 
domestic  claims,  and  then  faithful  martyrs  accepted  the 
cross  even  at  the  cost  of  the  dear  love  of  home  and  all 
its  priceless  jewels,  as,  for  instance,  in  the  familiar  story 
of  Perpetua  and  Felicitas.  The  same  choice  had  to 
be  made  again  under  Catholic  persecution  among  the 
Huguenots,  as  we  are  reminded  by  Millais'  well-known 
picture,  and  even  in  a  quasi-protestant  persecution  in 
the  case  of  Sir  Thomas  More.  It  faces  the  convert 
from  Hindooism  in  India  to-day.  Therefore  whatever 
opinion  we  may  form  of  the  particular  action  of 
Ezra,  we  should  do  well  to  ponder  gravely  over  the 
grand  principle  on  which  it  was  based.  God  must  have 
the  first  place  in  the  hearts  and  lives  of  His  people, 
even  though  in  some  cases  this  may  involve  the  ship- 
wreck of  the  dearest  earthly  affections. 


CHAPTER   XIV. 

THE   COST  OF  AN  IDEALIST'S  SUCCESS. 


THE  fourth  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Ezra  contains 
an  account  of  a  correspondence  between  the 
Samaritan  colonists  and  two  kings  of  Persia,  which 
follows  sharply  on  the  first  mention  of  the  intrigues  of 
*'  the  enemies  of  Judah  and  Benjamin  "  at  the  Persian 
court  in  the  later  days  of  Cyrus,  and  which  precedes 
the  description  of  the  fortunes  of  the  Jews  in  the  reign 
of  Darius.  If  this  has  its  right  chronological  position  in 
the  narrative,  it  must  relate  to  the  interval  during  which 
the  temple-building  was  in  abeyance.  In  that  case  the 
two  kings  of  Persia  would  be  Cambyses,  the  son  and 
successor  of  Cyrus,  and  Pseudo-Bardes.  But  the  names 
in  the  text  are  Ahasuerus  (Ahashverosh)  and  Artaxerxes 
(Arfalishashia).  It  has  been  suggested  that  these  are 
second  names  for  the  predecessors  of  Darius.  Un- 
doubtedly it  was  customary  for  Persian  monarchs  to 
have  more  than  one  name.  But  elsewhere  in  the 
Biblical  narratives  these  two  names  are  invariably  ap- 
plied to  the  successors  of  Darius — the  first  standing  for 
the  well-known  Xerxes  and  the  second  for  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus.  The  presumption  therefore  is  that  the 
same  kings  are  designated  by  them  here.  Moreover, 
when  we  examine  the  account  of  the  correspondence 


154  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER.   *• 

with  the  Persian  court,  we  find  that  this  agrees  best  with 
the  later  period.  The  opening  verses  of  the  fourth 
chapter  of  Ezra  deal  with  the  building  of  the  temple  ; 
the  last  verse  of  that  chapter  and  the  succeeding 
narrative  of  the  fifth  chapter  resume  the  same  topic. 
But  the  correspondence  relates  to  the  building  of  the 
walls  of  the  city.  There  is  not  a  word  about  any  such 
work  in  the  context.  Then  in  the  letter  addressed  to 
Artaxerxes  the  writers  describe  the  builders  of  the  walls 
as  "  the  Jews  which  came  up  from  thee!^  *  This  descrip- 
tion would  not  fit  Zerubbabel  and  his  followers,  who 
migrated  under  Cyrus.  But  it  would  apply  to  those 
w^ho  accompanied  Ezra  to  Jerusalem  in  the  reign  of 
Artaxerxes.  Lastly,  the  reign  of  Pseudo-Bardes  is  too 
brief  for  all  that  would  have  to  be  crowded  into  it. 
It  only  occupied  seven  months.  Yet  a  letter  is  sent  up 
from  the  enemies  of  the  Jews  ;  inquiry  is  made  into 
the  history  of  Jerusalem  by  Persian  officials  at  the 
court ;  a  reply  based  on  this  inquiry  is  transmitted  to 
Palestine ;  in  consequence  of  this  reply  an  expedition  is 
organised  which  effectually  stops  the  works  at  Jerusalem, 
but  only  after  the  exercise  of  force  on  the  spot.  It  is 
nearly  impossible  for  all  this  to  have  happened  in  so 
short  a  time  as  s«ven  months.  All  the  indications 
therefore  concur  to  assign  the  correspondence  to  the 
later  period. 

The  chronicler  must  have  inserted  this  section  out  of 
its  order  for  some  reason  of  his  own.  Probably  he  de- 
sired to  accentuate  the  impression  of  the  malignant  and 
persistent  enmity  of  the  colonists,  and  with  this  end 
in  view  described  the  later  acts  of  antagonism  directly 
after  mentioning  the  first  outbreak  of  opposition.      It 

*  Ezra  iv.  12. 


Ezra  iv.  6-23.]       COST  OF  AN  IDEALISTS  SUCCESS.         155 

is  just  possible  that  he  perceived  the  unfavourable 
character  of  his  picture  of  the  Jews  in  their  curt  refusal 
of  assistance  from  their  neighbours,  and  that  he  desired 
to  balance  this  by  an  accumulation  of  weighty  indict- 
ments against  the  people  whom  the  Jews  had  treated 
so  ungraciously. 

In  his  account  of  the  correspondence  with  the  Persian 
court  the  chronicler  seems' to  have  taken  note  of  three 
separate  letters  from  the  unfriendly  colonists.  First, 
he  tells  us  that  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Ahasuerus  they  wrote  an  accusation  against  the  Jews.* 
This  was  before  the  mission  of  Ezra ;  therefore  it  was 
a  continuance  of  the  old  opposition  that  had  been  seen 
in  the  intrigues  that  preceded  the  reign  of  Darius  ; 
it  shows  that  after  the  death  of  that  friendly  monarch 
the  slumbering  fires  broke  out  afresh.  Next,  he  names 
certain  men  who  wrote  to  Artaxerxes,  and  he  adds  that 
their  letter  was  translated  and  written  in  the  Aramaic 
language — the  language  which  was  the  common  medium 
of  intercourse  in  trade  and  official  affairs  among  the 
mixed  races  inhabiting  Syria  and  all  the  regions  west 
of  the  Euphrates.!  The  reference  to  this  language 
probably  arises  from  the  fact  that  the  chronicler  had 
seen  a  copy  of  the  translation.  He  does  not  tell  us 
anything  either  of  the  nationality  of  the  writers  or  of 
the  subject  of  their  letter.  It  has  been  suggested  that 
they  were  Jev/s  in  Jerusalem  who  wrote  to  plead  their 
cause  with  the  Persian  king.  The  fact  that  two  of 
them  bore  Persian  names — viz.,  Bishlam  and  Mithredath 
— does  not  present  a  serious  difficulty  to  this  view,  as 
we  know  that  some  Jews  received  such  names,  Zerub- 
babel,  for  example,  being  named  Sheshbazzar.     But  as 

*  Ezra  iv.  6.  -f  Ezra  iv.  7. 


156  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

the  previous  passage  refers  to  an  accusation  against  the 
Jews,  and  as  the  following  sentences  give  an  account 
of  a  letter  also  written  by  the  inimical  colonists,  it  is 
scarcely  likely  that  the  intermediate  colourless  verse 
which  mentions  the  letter  of  Bishlam  and  his  com- 
panions is  of  a  different  character.  We  should  expect 
some  more  explicit  statement  if  that  were  the  case. 
Moreover,  it  is  most  improbable  that  the  passage  which 
follows  would  begin  abruptly  without  an  adversative 
conjunction — as  is  the  case — if  it  proceeded  to  describe 
a  letter  provoked  by  opposition  to  another  letter  just 
mentioned.  Therefore  we  must  regard  Bishlam  and 
his  companions  as  enemies  of  the  Jews.  Now  some 
who  have  accepted  this  view  have  maintained  that  the 
letter  of  Bishlam  and  his  friends  is  no  other  than  the 
letter  ascribed  to  Rehum  and  Shimshai  in  the  following 
verses.  It  is  stated  that  the  former  letter  was  in  the 
Aramaic  language,  and  the  letter  which  is  ascribed  to 
the  two  great  officials  is  in  that  language.  But  the 
distinct  statement  that  each  group  of  men  wrote  a  letter 
seems  to  imply  that  there  were  two  letters  written  in  the 
reign  of  Artaxerxes,  or  three  in  all. 

The  third  letter  is  the  only  one  that  the  chronicler 
has  preserved.  He  gives  it  in  the  Aramaic  language, 
and  from  Ezra  iv.  8,  where  this  is  introduced,  to  vi.  i8, 
his  narrative  proceeds  in  that  language,  probably 
because  he  found  his  materials  in  some  Aramaic 
document. 

Some  have  assigned  this  letter  to  the  period  of  the 
reign  of  Artaxerxes  prior  to  the  mission  of  Ezra.  But 
there  are  two  reasons  for  thinking  it  must  have  been 
written  after  that  mission.  The  first  has  been  already 
referred  to — viz.,  that  the  complaint  about  ''  the  Jews 
which  came  up  from  thee  "  points  to  some  large  migra- 


Ezra  iv.  6-23.]       COST  OF  AN  IDEALISTS  SUCCESS.         157 


tion  during  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes,  which  must  be 
Ezra's  expedition.  The  second  reason  arises  from  a 
comparison  of  the  results  of  the  correspondence  with 
the  description  of  Jerusalem  in  the  opening  of  the  Book 
of  Nehemiah.  The  violence  of  the  Samaritans  recorded 
in  Ezra  iv.  23  will  account  for  the  deplorable  state  of 
Jerusalem  mentioned  in  Nehemiah  i.  3,  the  effects  of 
the  invasion  referred  to  in  the  former  passage  agreeing 
well  with  the  condition  of  the  dismantled  city  reported 
to  Nehemiah.  But  in  the  history  of  Ezra's  expedition 
no  reference  is  made  to  any  such  miserable  state  of 
affairs.  Thus  the  correspondence  must  be  assigned  to 
the  time  between  the  close  of  Ezra"  and  the  beginning 
of  "Nehemiah." 

It  is  to  Ezra's  company,  then,  that  the  correspondence 
with  Artaxerxes  refers.  There  were  two  parties  in 
Jerusalem,  and  the  opposition  was  against  the  active 
reforming  party,  which  now  had  the  upper  hand  in  the 
city.  Immediately  we  consider  this,  the  cause  of  the 
continuance  and  increase  of  the  antagonism  of  the 
colonists  becomes  apparent.  Ezra's  harsh  reformation 
in  the  expulsion  of  foreign  wives  must  have  struck 
the  divorced  women  as  a  cruel,  and  insulting  outrage. 
Driven  back  to  their  paternal  homes  with  their  burning 
wrongs,  these  poor  women  must  have  roused  the  utmost 
indignation  among  their  people.  Thus  the  reformer 
had  stirred  up  a  hornets'  nest.  The  legislator  who 
ventures  to  interfere  with  the  sacred  privacy  of  domestic 
life  excites  the  deepest  passions,  and  a  wise  man  will 
think  twice  before  he  meddles  in  so  dangerous  a  busi- 
ness. Only  the  most  imperative  requirements  of  religion 
and  righteousness  can  justify  such  a  course,  and  even 
when  it  is  justified  nobody  can  foresee  how  far  the 
trouble  it  brings  may  spread. 


iS8  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

The  letter  which  the  chronicler  transcribes  seems 
to  have  been  the  most  important  of  the  three.  It  was 
written  by  two  great  Persian  officials.  In  our  English 
versions  the  first  of  these  is  called  '^the  chancellor/'  and 
the  second  ''the  scribe."  ''The  chancellor "  was  pro- 
bably the  governor  of  a  large  district,  of  which  Palestine 
was  but  a  provincial  section ;  and  "  the  scribe "  his 
secretary.  Accordingly  it  is  apparent  that  the  per- 
sistent enmity  of  the  colonists,  their  misrepresentations, 
and  perhaps  their  bribes,  had  resulted  in  instigating 
opposition  to  the  Jews  in  very  high  places.  The  action 
of  the  Jews  themselves  may  have  excited  suspicion  in 
the  mind  of  the  Persian  Satrap,  for  it  would  seem  from 
his  letter  that  they  had  just  commenced  to  fortify  their 
city.  The  names  of  the  various  peoples  who  are 
associated  with  these  two  great  men  in  the  title  of  the 
letter  also  show  how  far  the  opposition  to  the  Jews  had 
spread.  They  are  given  as  the  peoples  whom  Osnappar 
(Esar-bani-pal)  had  brought  over  and  set  in  the  city  of 
Samaria,  '^  and  in  the  rest  of  the  country  beyond  the  river.'''^ 
That  is  to  say,  the  settlers  in  the  vast  district  west  of 
the  Euphrates  are  included.  Here  \N^re:  Apharsathchites 
— who  cannot  be  the  Persians,  as  some  have  thought, 
because  no  Assyrian  king  ever  seems  to  have  pene- 
trated to  Persia,  but  may  be  the  Paraetaceni  of 
Herodotus, t  a  Median  people;  Tarpclites — probably 
the  people  named  among  the  Hebrews  after  Tubal  ;  % 
Apharsites — also  wrongly  identified  by  some  with  the 
Persians,  but  probably  another  Median  people  ;  Arche- 
vites,  from  the  ancient  Erech  {Uruk)  ;  §  Babylonians,  not 
only  from  the  city  of  Babylon,  but  also  from  its  neigh- 


*  Ezra  iv.  lo.  %  Gen.  x.  2. 

I  Herodotus,  i.  loi.  §  Gen.  x.  lo. 


Ezra  iv.  6-23.]       COST  OF  AN  IDEALISTS  SUCCESS.         159 


bourhood;  Shushanchiies,  from  Shusan(Sw5a),  the  capital 
of  Susiana ;  DeJiaites — possibly  the  Dai  of  Herodotus,* 
because,  though  these  were  Persians,  they  were  nomads 
who  ma}^  have  wandered  far ;  Elamites,  from  the 
country  of  which  Susa  was  capital.  A  terrific  array  ! 
The  very  names  would  be  imposing.  All  these  people 
were  now  united  in  a  common  bond  of  enmity  to  the 
Jews  of  Jerusalem.  Anticipating  the  fate  of  the 
Christians  in  the  Roman  Empire,  though  on  very 
different  grounds,  the  Jews  seem  to  have  been  regarded 
by  the  peoples  of  Western  Asia  with  positive  antipathy 
as  enemies  of  the  human  race.  Their  anti-social  con- 
duct had  alienated  all  who  knew  them.  But  the  letter  of 
indictment  brought  a  false  charge  against  them.  The 
opponents  of  the  Jews  could  not  formulate  any  charge 
out  of  their  real  grievances  sufficiently  grave  to  secure 
an  adverse  verdict  from  the  supreme  authority.  They 
therefore  trumped  up  an  accusation  of  treason.  It  was 
untrue,  for  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem  had  always  been  the 
most  peaceable  and  loyal  subjects  of  the  Great  King. 
The  search  which  was  made  into  the  previous  history 
of  the  city  could  only  have  brought  to  light  any  evi- 
dence of  a  spirit  of  independence  as  far  back  as  the 
time  of  the  Babylonian  invasions.  Still  this  was 
enough  to  supplement  the  calumnies  of  the  irritated 
opponents  which  the  Satrap  and  his  secretary  had  been 
persuaded  to  echo  with  all  the  authority  of  their  high 
position.  Moreover,  Egypt  was  now  in  revolt,  and  the 
king  may  have  been  persuaded  to  suspect  the  Jews 
of  sympathy  with  the  rebels.  So  Jerusalem  was  con- 
demned as  a  "  bad  city " ;  the  Persian  officials  went 
up    and    forcibly    stopped    the    building    of  the   walls, 

*  Herodotus,  i.  125. 


i6o       EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

and  the  Jews  were  reduced  to  a  condition  of  helpless 
misery. 

This  was  the  issue  of  Ezra's  reformation.  Can  we 
call  it  a  success  ?  The  answer  to  such  a  question  will 
depend  on  what  kind  of  success  we  may  be  looking  for. 
Politically,  socially,  regarded  from  the  standpoint  of 
material  profit  and  loss,  there  was  nothing  but  the 
most  dismal  failure.  But  Ezra  was  not  a  statesman ; 
he  did  not  aim  at  national  greatness,  nor  did  he  aim 
even  at  social  amelioration.  In  our  own  day,  when 
social  improvements  are  regarded  by  many  as  the  chief 
ends  of  government  and  philanthropy,  it  is  difficult  to 
sympathise  with  conduct  which  ran  counter  to  the 
home  comforts  and  commercial  prosperity  of  the  people. 
A  policy  which  deliberately  VvTecked  these  obviously 
attractive  objects  of  Ufe  in  pursuit  of  entirely  different 
aims  is  so  completely  remote  from  modern  habits  of 
thought  and  conduct  that  we  have  to  make  a  consider- 
able effort  of  imagination  if  we  would  understand  the 
man  who  promoted  it.     How  are  we  to  picture  him  ? 

Ezra  was  an  ideaHst.  Now  the  success  of  an  idealist 
is  not  to  be  sought  for  in  material  prosperity.  He 
lives  for  his  idea.  If  this  idea  triumphs  he  is  satisfied, 
because  he  has  attained  the  one  kind  of  success  he 
aimed  at.  He  is  not  rich  ;  but  he  never  sowed  the  seed 
of  wealth.  He  may  never  be  honoured  :  he  has  deter- 
mined to  set  himself  against  the  current  of  popular 
fashion  ;  how  then  can  he  expect  popular  favour  ? 
Possibly  he  may  meet  with  misapprehension,  contempt, 
hatred,  death.  The  greatest  Idealist  the  world  ever 
saw  was  excommunicated  as  a  heretic;  insulted  by 
His  opponents,  and  deserted  by  most  of  His  friends  ; 
tortured  and  crucified.  The  best  of  His  disciples,  those 
who   had    caught  the   enthusiasm    of   His    idea,   were 


Ezra  iv.  6-23.]       COST  OF  AN  IDEALISTS  SUCCESS.         161 

treated  as  the  offscouring  of  the  earth.  Yet  we  now 
recognise  that  the  grandest  victory  ever  achieved  was 
won  at  Calvary  ;  and  we  now  regard  the  travels  of 
St.  Paul,  through  stoning  and  scourging,  through 
Jewish  hatred  and  Christian  jealousy,  on  to  the  block, 
as  nothing  less  than  a  magnificent  triumphant  march. 
The  idealist  succeeds  when  his  idea  is  established. 

Judged  by  this  standard — the  only  fair  standard — 
Ezra's  work  cannot  be  pronounced  a  failure.  On  the 
contrary,  he  accomplished  just  what  he  aimed  at.  He 
established  the  separateness  of  the  Jews.  Among  our- 
selves, more  than  two  thousand  years  after  his  time, 
his  great  idea  is  still  the  m.ost  marked  feature  of  his 
people.  All  along  the  ages  it  has  provoked  jealousy 
and  suspicion  ;  and  often  it  has  been  met  by  cruel  per- 
secution. The  separate  people  have  been  treated  as 
only  too  separate  from  the  rest  of  mankind.  Thus  the 
history  of  the  Jews  has  become  one  long  tragedy.  It  is 
infinitely  sad.  Yet  it  is  incomparably  more  noble  than 
the  hollow  comedy  of  existence  to  which  the  absence 
of  all  aims  apart  from  personal  pleasure  reduces  the 
story  of  those  people  who  have  sunk  so  low  that  they 
have  no  ideas.  Moreover,  with  Ezra  the  racial  idea 
was  really  subordinate  to  the  religious  idea.  To  secure 
the  worship  of  God,  free  from  all  contamination — this 
was  his  ultimate  purpose.  In  accomplishing  it  he  must 
have  a  devoted  people  also  free  from  contamination,  a 
priesthood  still  more  separate  and  consecrated,  and  a 
ritual  carefully  guarded  and  protected  from  defilement. 
Hence  arose  his  great  work  in  pubHshing  the  authori- 
tative codified  scriptures  of  the  Jews.  To  a  Christian 
all  this  has  its  defects — formalism,  externalism,  needless 
narrowness.  Yet  it  succeeded  in  saving  the  religion  of 
the  Jews,  and  in  transmitting  that  religion  to  future 

II 


1 62  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

ages  as  a  precious  casket  containing  the  seed  of  the 
great  spiritual  faith  for  which  the  world  was  waiting. 
There  is  something  of  the  schoolmaster  in  Ezra ;  but 
he  is  like  the  law  he  loved  so  devoutly — a  schoolmaster 
who  brings  us  to  Christ.  He  was  needed  both  for  his 
times  and  also  in  order  to  lay  the  foundation  of  coming 
ages.  Who  shall  say  that  such  a  man  was  not  sent  of 
God  ?  How  can  we  deny  to  his  unique  work  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Holy  Spirit  ?  The  harshness  of  its 
outward  features  must  not  blind  us  to  the  sublimity 
of  its  inner  thought  or  the  beneficence  of  its  ultimate 
purpose. 


CHAPTER   XV. 

NEHEMIAH   THE  PATRIOT. 


THE  Book  of  Nehemiah  is  the  last  part  of  the 
chronicler's  narrative.  Although  it  was  not 
originally  a  separate  work,  we  can  easily  see  why  the 
editor,  who  broke  up  the  original  volume  into  distinct 
books,  'divided  it  just  where  he  did.  An  interval  of 
twelve  or  thirteen  years  comes  between  Ezra's  reforma- 
tion and  the  events  recorded  in  the  opening  of  "  Nehe- 
miah." Still  a  much  longer  period  was  passed  over  in 
silence  in  the  middle  of  "  Ezra."  *  A  more  important 
reason  for  the  division  of  the  narrative  may  be  found 
in  the  introduction  of  a  new  character.  The  book 
which  now  bears  his  name  is  largely  devoted  to  the 
actions  of  Nehemiah ;  and  it  commences  with  an  auto- 
biographical narrative,  which  occupies  the  first  six 
chapters  and  part  of  the  seventh. 

Nehemiah  plunges  suddenly  into  his  story,  without 
giving  us  any  hints  of  his  previous  history.  His 
father,  Hacaliah,  is  only  a  name  to  us.  It  was  neces- 
sary to  state  this  name  in  order  to  distinguish  the 
writer  from  other  men  named  Nehemiah.  t      There  is 


*  At  Ezra  vii.  i. 

f  E.g.,  the  Nehemiah  of  Ezra  ii.  2,  who  is  certainly  another  person. 
163 


1 64  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

no  reason  to  think  that  his  privileged  position  at  court 
indicates  high  family  connections.  The  conjecture  of 
Ewald  that  he  owed  his  important  and  lucrative  office 
to  his  personal  beauty  and  youthful  attractions  is 
enough  to  account  for  it.  His  appointment  to  the 
office  formerly  held  by  Zerubbabel  is  no  proof  that  he 
belonged  to  the  Jewish  royal  family.  At  the  despotic 
Persian  court  the  king's  kindness  towards  a  favourite 
servant  would  override  all  claims  of  princely  rank. 
Besides,  it  is  most  improbable  that  we  should  have  no 
hint  of  the  Davidic  descent  if  this  had  been  one  ground 
of  the  appointment.  Eusebius  and  Jerom.e  both 
describe  Nehemiah  as  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  Jerome 
is  notoriously  inaccurate  ;  Eusebius  is  a  cautious  his- 
torian, but  it  is  not  Hkely  that  in  his  late  age — as  long 
after  Nehemiah  as  our  age  is  after  Thomas  a  Becket — 
he  could  have  any  trustworthy  evidence  beyond  that  of 
the  Scriptures.  The  statement  that  the  city  of  Jerusalem 
was  the  place  of  the  sepulchres  of  his  ancestors  *  lends 
some  plausibility  to  the  suggestion  that  Nehemiah 
belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Judah.  With  this  we  must  be 
content. 

It  is  more  to  the  point  to  notice  that,  like  Ezra,  the 
younger  man,  whose  practical  energy  and  high  authority 
were  to  further  the  reforms  of  the  somewhat  doctrinaire 
scribe,  was  a  Jew  of  the  exile.  Once  more  it  is  in  the 
East,  far  away  from  Jerusalem,  that  the  impulse  is  found 
for  furthering  the  cause  of  the  Jews.  Thus  we  are 
again  reminded  that  wave  after  wave  sweeps  up  from 
the  Babylonian  plains  to  give  life  and  strength  to  the 
religious  and  civic  restoration. 

The  peculiar  circumstances  of  Nehemiah  deepen  our 


*  Neh.  ii.  3. 


Neh.  i.  1-3.]  NEHEMIAH   THE  PATRIOT.  165 

interest  in  his  patriotic  and  religious  work.  In  his 
case  it  was  not  the  hardships  of  captivity  that  fostered 
the  aspirations  of  the  spiritual  life,  for  he  was  in  a 
position  of  personal  ease  and  prosperity.  We  can 
scarcely  think  of  a  lot  less  likely  to  encourage  the  prin- 
ciples of  patriotism  and  religion  than  that  of  a  favourite 
upper  servant  in  a  foreign,  heathen  court.  The  office 
held  by  Nehemiah  was  not  one  of  political  rank.  He 
was  a  palace  slave,  not  a  minister  of  state  like  Joseph 
or  Daniel.  But  among  the  household  servants  he 
would  take  a  high  position.  The  cup-bearers  had  a 
special  privilege  of  admission  to  the  august  presence 
of  their  sovereign  in  his  most  private  seclusion.  The 
king's  life  was  in  their  hands ;  and  the  wealthy  enemies 
of  a  despotic  sovereign  would  be  ready  enough  to  bribe 
them  to  poison  the  king,  if  only  they  proved  to  be  cor- 
ruptible. The  requirement  that  they  should  first  pour 
some  wine  into  their  own  hands,  and  drink  the  sample 
before  the  king,  is  an  indication  that  fear  of  treachery 
haunted  the  mind  of  an  Oriental  monarch,  as  it  does  the 
mind  of  a  Russian  czar  to-day.  Even  with  this  rough 
safeguard  it  was  necessary  to  select  men  who  could 
be  relied  upon.  Thus  the  cup-bearers  would  become 
"  favourites."  At  all  events,  it  is  plain  that  Nehemiah 
was  regarded  with  peculiar  favour  by  the  king  he 
served.  No  doubt  he  was  a  faithful  servant,  and  his 
fidelity  in  his  position  of  trust  at  court  was  a  guarantee 
of  similar  fidelity  in  a  more  responsible  and  far  more 
trying  office. 

Nehemiah  opens  his  story  by  telling  us  that  he  was 
in  "  the  palace,"  *  or  rather  "  the  fortress,"  at  Susa,  the 
winter  abode  of  the  Persian  monarchs — an  Elamite  city, 

*  Neh.  i.  I. 


i66  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

the  stupendous  remains  of  which  astonish  the  traveller 
in  the  present  day — eighty  miles  east  of  the  Tigris  and 
within  sight  of  the  Bakhtiyari  Mountains.  Here  was 
the  great  hall  of  audience,  the  counterpart  of  another 
at  Persepolis.  These  two  were  perhaps  the  largest 
rooms  in  the  ancient  world  next  to  that  at  Karnak. 
Thirty-six  fluted  columns,  distributed  as  six  rows 
of  six  columns  each,  slender  and  widely  spaced, 
supported  a  roof  extending  two  hundred  feet  each 
way.  The  month  Chislev,  in  which  the  occurrence 
Nehemiah  proceeds  to  relate  happened,  corresponds  to 
parts  of  our  November  and  December.  The  name  is  an 
Assyrian  and  Babylonian  one,  and  so  are  all  the  names 
of  the  months  used  by  the  Jews.  Further,  Nehemiah 
speaks  of  what  he  here  narrates  as  happening  in  the 
twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes,  and  in  the  next  chapter 
he  mentions  a  subsequent  event  as  occurring  in  the 
month  Nisan  *  in  the  same  year.  This  shows  that  he 
did  not  reckon  the  year  to  begin  at  Nisan,  as  the  Jews 
were  accustomed  to  reckon  it.  He  must  have  followed 
the  general  Asiatic  custom,  which  begins  the  year  in 
the  autumn,  or  else  he  must  have  regulated  his  dates 
according  to  the  time  of  the  king's  accession.  In  either 
case  we  see  how  thoroughly  un-Jewish  the  setting  of 
his  narrative  is — unless  a  third  explanation  is  adopted, 
viz.,  that  the' Jewish  year,  beginning  in  the  spring,  only 
counts  from  the  adoption  of  Ezra's  edition  of  The  Law. 
Be  this  as  it  may,  other  indications  of  Orientalism, 
derived  from  his  court  surroundings,  will  attract  our 
attention  in  our  consideration  of  his  language  later  on. 
No  writer  of  the  Bible  reflects  the  influence  of  alien 
culture  more  clearly  than  Nehemiah.     Outwardly,  he  is 

*  Neh.  ii.  I 


Neh.  i.  1-3.]         NEHEMIAH  THE  PATRIOT.  167 

the  most  foreign  Jew  we  meet  with  in  Scripture.  Yet 
in  Hfe  and  character  he  is  the  very  ideal  of  a  Jewish 
patriot.  His  patriotism  shines  all  the  more  splendidly 
because  it  bursts  out  of  a  foreign  environment.  Thus 
Nehemiah  shows  how  little  his  dialect  and  the  manners 
he  exhibits  can  be  taken  as  the  gauge  of  a  man's  true 
life. 

Nehemiah  states  that,  while  he  was  thus  at  Susa,  in 
winter  residence  with  the  court,  one  of  his  brethren, 
named  Hanani,  together  with  certain  men  of  Judah, 
came  to  him.*  The  language  here  used  will  admit  of 
our  regarding  Hanani  as  only  a  more  or  less  distant 
relative  of  the  cup-bearer ;  but  a  later  reference  to  him 
at  Jerusalem  as  "  my  brother  Hanani"  f  shows  that  his 
own  brother  is  meant. 

Josephus  has  an  especially  graphic  account  of  the 
incident.  We  have  no  means  of  discovering  whether 
he  drew  it  from  an  authentic  source,  but  its  picturesque- 
ness  may  justify  the  insertion  of  it  here  :  "  Now  there 
was  one  of  those  Jews  who  had  been  carried  captive, 
who  was  cup-bearer  to  King  Xerxes ;  his  name  was 
Nehemiah.  As  this  man  was  walking  before  Susa, 
the  metropoHs  of  the  Persians,  he  heard  some  strangers 
that  were  entering  the  city,  after  a  long  journey,  speak- 
ing to  one  another  in  the  Hebrew  tongue  ;  so'  he  went 
to  them  and  asked  from  whence  they  came  ;  and  when 
their  answer  was,  that  they  came  from  Judaea,  he  began 
to  inquire  of  them  again  in  what  state  the  multitude 
was,  and  in  what  condition  Jerusalem  was  :  and  when 
they  replied  that  they  were  in  a  bad  state,  for  that 
their  walls  were  thrown  down  to  the  ground,  and  that 
the  neighbouring  nations  did  a  great  deal  of  mischief 

*  Neh.  i.  2.  t  Neh.  vii.  2, 


i68  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

to  the  Jews,  while  in  the  day-time  they  over-ran  the 
country  and  pillaged  it,  and  in  the  night  did  them  mis- 
chief, insomuch  that  not  a  few  were  led  away  captive 
out  of  the  country,  and  out  of  Jerusalem  itself,  and  that 
the  roads  were  in  the  day-time  found  full  of  dead  men. 
Hereupon  Nehemiah  shed  tears,  out  of  commiseration 
of  the  calamities  of  his  countrymen  ;  and,  looking  up  to 
heaven,  he  said,  '  How  long,  O  Lord,  wilt  thou  overlook 
our  nation,  while  it  suffers  so  great  miseries,  and  while 
we  are  made  the  prey  and  the  spoil  of  all  men  ? '  And 
while  he  staid  at  the  gate,  and  lamented  thus,  one  told 
him  that  the  king  was  going  to  sit  down  to  supper  ;  so 
he  made  haste,  and  went  as  he  was,  without  wash- 
ing himself,  to  minister  to  the  king  in  his  office  of 
cup-bearer,"  etc.* 

Evidently  Nehemiah  was  expressly  sought  out.  His 
influence  would  naturally  be  valued.  There  was  a 
large  Jewish  community  at  Susa,  and  Nehemiah  must 
have  enjoyed  a  good  reputation  among  his  people; 
otherwise  it  would  have  been  vain  for  the  travellers  to 
obtain  an  interview  with  him.  The  eyes  of  these  Jews 
were  turned  to  the  royal  servant  as  the  fellow-country- 
man of  greatest  influence  at  court.  But  Nehemiah 
anticipated  their  message  and  relieved  them  of  all 
difficulty  by  questioning  them  about  the  city  of  their 
fathers.  Jerusalem  was  hundreds  of  miles  away  across 
the  desert ;  no  regular  methods  of  communication  kept 
the  Babylonian  colony  informed  of  the  condition  of  the 
advance  guard  at  the  ancient  capital ;  therefore  scraps 
of  news  brought  by  chance  travellers  were  eagerly 
devoured  by  those  who  were  anxious  for  the  rare 
information.     Plainly   Nehemiah    shared    this  anxiety. 

*  Josephus,  Ant.,  XL  v.  6. 


Neh.  i.  1-3.]  NEHEMI AH   THE- PATRIOT.  169 

His  question  was  quite  spontaneous,  and  it  suggests  that 
amid  the  distractions  of  his  court  life  his  thoughts  had 
often  reverted  to  the  ancient  home  of  his  people.  If 
he  had  not  been  truly  patriotic,  he  could  have  used 
some  device,  which  his  palace  experience  would  have 
readily  suggested,  so  as  to  divert  the  course  of  this 
conversation  with  a  group  of  simple  men  from  the 
country,  and  keep  the  painful  subject  in  the  back- 
ground. He  must  have  seen  clearly  that  for  one  in  his 
position  of  influence  to  make  inquiries  about  a  poor 
and  distressed  community  was  to  raise  expectations  of 
assistance.  But  his  questions  were  earnest  and  eager, 
because  his  interest  was  genuine. 

The  answers  to  Nehemiah's  inquiries  struck  him 
with  surprise  as  well  as  grief.  The  shock  with  which 
he  received  them  reminds  us  of  Ezra's  startled  horror 
when  the  lax  practices  of  the  Jewish  leaders  were 
reported  to  him,  although  the  trained  court  official  did 
not  display  the  abandonment  of  emotion  which  was 
seen  in  the  student  suddenly  plunged  into  the  vortex  of 
public  life  and  unprepared  for  one  of  those  dread  sur- 
prises which  men  of  the  world  drill  themselves  to  face 
with  comparative  calmness. 

We  must  now  examine  the  news  that  surprised  and 
distressed  Nehemiah.  His  brother  and  the  other 
travellers  from  Jerusalem  inform  him  that  the  descend- 
ants of  the  returned  captives,  the  residents  of  Jerusalem, 
"  are  in  great  affliction  and  reproach " ;  and  also  that 
the  city  walls  have  been  broken  down  and  the  gates 
burnt.  The  description  of  the  defenceless  and  dis- 
honoured state  of  the  city  is  what  most  strikes  Nehemiah. 
Now  the  question  is  to  what  calamities  does  this  report 
refer  ?  According  to  the  usual  understanding,  it  is  a 
description    of  the   state  of  Jerusalem  which   resulted 


I70  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

from  the  sieges  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  But  there  are 
serious  difficulties  in  the  way  of  this  view.  Nehemiah 
must  have  known  all  about  the  tremendous  events,  one 
of  the  results  of  which  was  seen  in  the  very  existence 
of  the  Jewish  colony  of  which  he  was  a  member.  The 
inevitable  consequences  of  that  notorious  disaster  could 
not  have  come  before  him  unexpectedly  and  as  startling 
news.  Besides,  the  present  distress  of  the  inhabitants 
is  closely  associated  with  the  account  of  the  ruin  of  the 
defences,  and  is  even  mentioned  first.  Is  it  possible 
that  one  sentence  should  include  what  was  happening 
now,  and  what  took  place  a  century  earlier,  in  a 
single  picture  of  the  city's  misery  ?  The  language 
seems  to  point  to  the  action  of  breaking  through  the 
walls  rather  than  to  such  a  general  demolition  of  them 
as  took  place  when  the  whole  city  was  razed  to  the 
ground  by  the  Babylonian  invaders.  Lastly,  the  action 
of  Nehemiah  cannot  be  accounted  for  on  this  hypothesis. 
He  is  plunged  into  grief  by  the  dreadful  news,  and  at 
first  he  can  only  mourn  and  fast  and  pray.  But  before 
long,  as  soon  as  he  obtains  permission  from  his  royal 
master,  he  sets  out  for  Jerusalem,  and  there  his  first 
great  work  is  to  restore  the  ruined  walls.  The  con- 
nection of  events  shows  that  it  is  the  information 
brought  to  him  by  Hanani  and  the  other  Jews  from 
Jerusalem  that  rouses  him  to  proceed  to  the  city.  All 
this  points  to  some  very  recent  troubles,  which  were 
previously  unknown  to  Nehemiah.  Can  we  find  any 
indication  of  those  troubles  elsewhere  ? 

The  opening  scene  in  the  patriotic  career  of  Nehemiah 
exactly  fit  in  with  the  events  which  came  under  our 
consideration  in  the  previous  chapter.  There  we  saw 
that  the  opposition  to  the  Jews  which  is  recorded  as 
early  as    Ezra  iv.,  but  attributed   to   the  reign  of  an 


Neh.  i.  1-3.]         NEHEMI AH   THE  PATRIOT.  171 

"  Artaxerxes,"  must  have  been  carried  into  effect  under 
Artaxerxes  Longimanus — Nehemiah's  master.  This 
must  have  been  subsequent  to  the  mission  of  Ezra  in 
the  seventh  year  of  Artaxerxes,  as  Ezra  makes  no 
mention  of  its  distressful  consequences.  The  news 
reached  Nehemiah  in  the  twentieth  year  of  the  same 
reign.  Therefore  the  mischief  must  have  been  wrought 
some  time  during  the  intervening  thirteen  years.  We 
have  no  history  of  that  period.  But  the  glimpse  of  its 
most  gloomy  experiences  afforded  by  the  detached  para- 
graph in  Ezra  iv.  exactly  fits  in  with  the  description  of 
the  resulting  condition  of  Jerusalem  in  the  Book  of 
Nehemiah.  This  will  fully  account  for  Nehemiah's 
surprise  and  grief;  it  will  also  throw  a  flood  of  hght  on 
his  character  and  subsequent  action.  If  he  had  only 
been  roused  to  repair  the  ravages  of  the  old  Babylonian 
invasions,  there  would  have  been  nothing  very  courageous 
in  his  undertaking.  Babylon  itself  had  been  over- 
thrown, and  the  enemy  of  Babylon  was  now  in  power. 
Anything  tending  to  obliterate  the  destructive  glory  of 
the  old  fallen  empire  might  be  accepted  with  favour  by 
the  Persian  ruler.  But  the  case  is  quite  altered  when 
we  think  of  the  more  recent  events.  The  very  work 
Nehemiah  was  to  undertake  had  been  attempted  but 
a  few  years  before,  and  it  had  failed  miserably.  The 
rebuilding  of  the  walls  had  then  excited  the  jealousy  of 
neighbouring  peoples,  and  their  gross  misrepresentations 
had  resulted  in  an  official  prohibition  of  the  work.  This 
prohibition,  however,  had  only  been  executed  by  acts 
of  violence,  sanctioned  by  the  government.  Worse 
than  all  else,  it  was  from  the  very  Artaxerxes  whom 
Nehemiah  served  that  the  sanction  had  been  obtained. 
He  was  an  easy-going  sovereign,  readily  accessible  to 
the  advice  of  his  ministers ;  in  the  earlier  part  of  his 


172  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

reign  he  showed  remarkable  favour  towards  the  Jews, 
when  he  equipped  and  despatched  Ezra  on  his  great 
expedition,  and  it  is  Hkely  enough  that  in  the  pressure 
of  his  multitudinous  affairs  the  King  would  soon  forget 
his  unfavourable  despatch.  Nevertheless  he  was  an 
absolute  monarch,  and  the  lives  of  his  subjects  were  in  his 
hands.  For  a  personal  attendant  of  such  a  sovereign 
to  show  sympathy  with  a  city  that  had  come  under 
his  disapproval  was  a  very  risky  thing.  Nehemiah 
may  have  felt  this  while  he  was  hiding  his  grief  from 
Artaxerxes.  But  if  so,  his  frank  confession  at  the  first 
opportunity  reflects  all  the  more  credit  on  his  patriotism 
and  the  courage  with  which  he  supported  it. 

Patriotism  is  the  most  prominent  principle  in 
Nehemiah's  conduct.  Deeper  considerations  emerge 
later,  especially  after  he  has  come  under  the  influence 
of  an  enthusiastic  religious  teacher  in  the  person  of 
Ezra.  But  at  first  it  is  the  city  of  his  fathers  that 
moves  his  heart.  He  is  particularly  distressed  at  its 
desolate  condition,  because  the  burial-place  of  his 
ancestors  is  there.  The  great  anxiety  of  the  Jews 
about  the  bodies  of  their  dead,  and  their  horror  of 
the  exposure  of  a  corpse,  made  them  look  with  peculiar 
concern  on  the  tombs  of  their  people.  In  sharing  the 
sentiments  that  spring  out  of  the  habits  of  his  people 
in  this  respect,  Nehemiah  gives  a  specific  turn  to  his 
patriotism.  He  longs  to  guard  and  honour  the  last 
resting-place  of  his  people ;  he  would  hear  of  any 
outrage  on  the  city  where  their  sepulchres  are  with  the 
greatest  distress.  Thus  filial  piety  mingles  with  patriot- 
ism, and  the  patriotism  itself  is  localised,  like  that  of 
the  Greeks,  and  directed  to  the  interests  of  a  single 
city.  Nehemiah  here  represents  a  different  attitude 
from   that  of  Mordecai.     It  is  not  the   Jew   that   he 


Neh.  i.  1-3.]  NEHEMJAH   THE  PATRIOT.  173 


thinks  of  in  the  first  instance,  but  Jerusalem ;  and 
Jerusalem  is  dear  to  him  primarily,  not  because  of  his 
kinsmen  who  are  living  there,  but  because  it  is  the  city 
of  his  fathers'  sepulchres,  the  city  of  the  great  past. 
Still  the  strongest  feelings  are  always  personal. 
Patriotism  loves  the  very  soil  of  the  fatherland ;  but 
the  depth  and  strength  of  the  passion  spring  from 
association  with  an  affection  for  the  people  that  inhabit 
it.  Without  this  patriotism  degenerates  into  a  flimsy 
sentiment.  At  Jerusalem  Nehemiah  develops  a  deep 
personal  interest  in  the  citizens.  Even  on  the  Susa 
acropolis,  where  the  very  names  of  these  people  are 
unknown  to  him,  the  thought  of  his  ancestry  gives  a 
sanctity  to  the  far-off  city.  Such  a  thought  is  enlarging 
and  purifying.  It  lifts  a  man  out  of  petty  personal 
concerns ;  it  gives  him  unselfish  sympathies  ;  it  pre- 
pares demands  for  sacrifice  and  service.  Thus,  while 
the  mock  patriotism  which  cares  only  for  glory  and 
national  aggrandisement  is  nothing  but  a  vulgar  product 
of  enlarged  selfishness,  the  true  patriotism  that  awakens 
large  human  sympathies  is  profoundly  unselfish,  and 
shows  itself  to  be  a  part  of  the  very  religion  of  a 
devoted  man. 


CHAPTER   XVI. 

NEHEMIAITS  PRAYER. 
Nehemiah  i.  4-1 1. 

NEHEMIAH  records  the  twofold  effect  of  the  melan- 
choly news  which  his  brother  and  the  other 
travellers  from  Jerusalem  brought  him.  Its  first  con- 
sequence was  grief ;  its  second  prayer.  The  grief  was 
expressed  in  the  dramatic  style  of  the  Oriental  by 
weeping,  lamentations,  fasting,  and  other  significant 
acts  and  attitudes  which  the  patriot  kept  up  for  some 
days.  Demonstrative  as  all  this  appears  to  us,  it  was 
calm  and  restrained  in  comparison  with  Ezra's  frantic 
outburst.  Still  it  was  the  sign  and  fruit  of  heartfelt 
distress,  for  Nehemiah  was  really  and  deeply  moved. 
Had  the  incident  ended  here,  we  should  have  seen  a 
picture  of  patriotic  sentiment,  such  as  might  be  looked 
for  in  any  loyal  Jew,  although  the  position  of  Nehemiah 
at  court  would  have  proved  him  loyal  under  exceptional 
circumstances.  But  the  prayer  which  is  the  outcome  ot 
the  soul-stirring  thoughts  and  feelings  of  devout  patriot- 
ism lifts  the  scene  into  a  much  higher  interest.  This 
prayer  is  singularly  penetrating,  revealing  a  keen 
insight  into  the  secret  of  the  calamities  of  Israel,  and 
an  exact  perception  of  the  relation  of  God  to  those 
calamities.  It  shows  a  knowledge  of  what  we  may  call 
the  theology  of  history,  of  the  Divine  laws  and  principles 


Neh.  i.  4-11.]  NEHEMIAH'S  PRAYER.  175 

which  are  above  and  behind  the  laws  and  principles  in- 
dicated by  the  expression  "  the  philosophy  of  history." 
In  form  it  is  a  combination  of  three  elements, — the 
language  of  devotion  cultivated  by  Persian  sages ;  ex- 
pressions culled  from  the  venerated  Hebrew  law-book, 
Deuteronomy ;  and  new  phrases  called  out  by  the  new 
needs  of  the  immediate  occasion.  Nehemiah  shows 
how  natural  it  is  for  a  person  to  fall  into  an  accepted 
dialect  of  worship,  even  in  an  original  prayer  the  end 
of  which  is  novel  and  special. 

He  opens  his  prayer  with  an  expression  that  seems 
to  be  more  Persian  than  Jewish.  He  does  not  make 
his  appeal  to  Jehovah  as  the  "  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,"  but  after  the  sacred  name  he  adds  the 
descriptive  title  "  God  of  heaven."  This  is  quite  a 
favourite  phrase  of  Nehemiah's.  Thus  in  describing 
his  interview  with  Artaxerxes  he  says,  "  So  I  prayed  to 
the  God  of  heaven " ;  *  and  at  Jerusalem  he  answers 
the  mockery  of  his  opponents  by  exclaiming,  ''The 
God  of  heaven,  He  will  prosper  us."  f  Now  the  same 
expression  is  found  repeatedly  in  the  chronicler's 
version  of  royal  edicts — in  the  edict  of  Cyrus,t  in  the 
edict  of  Darius,  §  in  the  edict  of  Artaxerxes.  ||  If  it  is 
indeed  of  Persian  origin,  the  use  of  it  by  Nehemiah  is 
most  significant.  In  this  case,  while  it  indicates  the 
speaker's  unconscious  adoption  of  the  language  of  his 
neighbours  and  shows  him  to  be  a  Jew  of  Oriental 
culture,  it  also  illustrates  a  far-reaching  process  of 
Providence.  Here  is  an  exalted  name  for  God,  the 
origin  of  which  is  apparently  Gentile,  accepted  and 
used   by  a  devout  Jew,   and  through  his  employment 


*  Neh.  ii.  4.  f  Neh.  ii.  20.  \  Ezra  i.  2. 

§  Ezra  vi.  10.  ||  Ezra  vii.  12,  21,  23. 


176       EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

of  it  passing  over  into  the  Scriptures,*  so  that  the 
religion  of  Israel  is  enriched  by  a  phrase  from  abroad. 
It  would  be  but  a  poor  championship  of  the  truth  of 
the  Hebrew  revelation  that  would  lead  us  to  close  our 
eyes  to  whatever  of  good  is  to  be  found  outside  its 
borders.  Certainly  we  honour  God  by  gladly  per- 
ceiving that  He  has  not  left  Himself  entirely  without 
witness  in  the  dim-lit  temple  of  Pagan  thought.  It  is 
a  ground  for  rejoicing  that,  while  the  science  of  Com- 
parative Religion  has  not  touched  the  unique  pre-em- 
inence of  the  Hebrew  and  Christian  Faith,  that  science 
has  been  able  to  recover  scattered  pearls  of  truth  that 
lay  strewn  over  the  waste  of  the  world's  wide  thinking. 
If  in  a  few  rare  cases  some  such  gems  had  been  found 
earlier  and  even  set  in  the  crown  of  Israel,  we  can  only 
be  thankful  that  the  One  Spirit  who  is  the  source  of  all 
revelation  has  thus  evinced  the  breadth  of  His  activity. 
Nor  should  it  disturb  our  faith  if  it  could  be  proved 
that  more  important  elements  of  our  religion  did  not 
originate  among  the  Jews,  but  came  from  Babylonian, 
Persian,  or  Greek  sources ;  for  why  should  not  God 
speak  through  a  Gentile  if  He  chooses  so  to  do  ?  This 
is  not  a  point  of  dogma.  It  is  simply  a  question  of  fact 
to  be  determined  by  historical  inquiry. 

We  cannot  say  for  certain,  however,  that  Nehemiah's 
phrase  was  coined  in  a  Persian  mint.  Its  novelty,  its 
absence  from  earlier  Hebrew  literature,  and  its  repeated 
appearance  in  the  edicts  of  Persian  kings  favour  the 
notion.  But  we  know  that  before  reaching  us  these 
edicts  have  been  more  or  less  translated  into  Hebrew 
forms  of  thought,  so  that  the  phrase  may  possibly  be 


*  It  is  used  by  the  chronicler,  and  it  is  found  in  Jonah  and  Daniel, 
and  once  even  in  our  recension  of  Genesis  (Gen.  xxiv.  7). 


Nch.  i.  4-II.]  NEHEMIAH'S  PRAYER.  177 

Jewish  after  all.  Still  even  in  that  case  it  seems  clear 
that  it  must  have  been  first  used  in  the  East  and  under 
the  Persian  rule.  The  widening  of  his  horizon  and  the 
elevation  of  his  idea  of  Providence  which  resulted  from 
the  experience  of  the  exile  helped  to  enlarge  and  exalt 
the  Jew's  whole  conception  of  God.  Jehovah  could  no 
longer  be  thought  of  as  a  tribal  divinity.  The  greater 
prophets  had  escaped  from  any  such  primitive  notion 
much  earlier,  but  not  the  bulk  of  the  nation.  Now 
the  exiles  saw  that  the  domain  of  their  God  could 
not  be  limited  to  the  hills  and  valleys  of  Palestine. 
They  perceived  how  His  arm  reached  from  the  river 
to  the  ends  of  the  earth  ;  how  His  might  was  every- 
where supreme,  directing  the  history  of  empires, 
overthrowing  great  monarchies,  establishing  new 
world-powers. 

A  more  subtle  movement  of  thought  has  been 
detected  in  the  appearance  of  this  suggestive  phrase, 
*'  God  of  heaven."  The  idea  of  the  transcendence  of 
God  is  seen  to  be  growing  in  the  mind  of  the  Jew. 
God  appears  to  be  receding  into  remote  celestial  regions 
— His  greatness  including  distance.  As  yet  this  is 
only  vaguely  felt ;  but  here  we  have  the  beginning  of 
a  characteristic  of  Judaism  which  becomes  more  and 
more  marked  in  course  of  time,  until  it  seems  as  though 
God  were  cut  off  from  all  direct  connection  with  men 
on  earth,  and  only  administering  the  world  through  a 
whole  army  of  intermediaries,  the  angels. 

After  this  phrase  with  the  Persian  flavour,  Nehemiah 
adds  expressions  borrowed  from  the  Hebrew  Book  of 
Deuteronomy,  a  book  with  ideas  and  words  from  which 
his  prayer  is  saturated  throughout.  God  is  described 
on  the  one  hand  as  ^' great  and  terrible,"  and  on  the 
other  hand  as  keeping  "  covenant  and  mercy  for  them 

12 


178  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

that  love  Him  and  observe  His  commandments.*  The 
Deuteronomist  adds  ^' to  a  thousand  generations" — a 
clause  not  needed  by  Nehemiah,  who  is  now  only 
concerned  with  one  special  occasion.  The  first  part  of 
the  description  is  in  harmony  with  the  new  and  exalted 
title  of  God,  and  therefore  it  fits  in  well  here.  It  is 
also  suitable  for  the  circumstances  of  the  prayer,  be- 
cause in  times  of  calamity  we  are  impressed  with  the 
power  and  terror  of  Providence.  There  is  another  side 
to  these  attributes,  however.  The  mention  of  them 
suggests  that  the  sufferers  have  not  fallen  into  the  hand 
of  man.  Hanani  and  his  fellow-Jews  made  no  allusion 
to  a  Divine  action  ;  they  could  not  see  beyond  the 
jealousy  of  neighbouring  people  in  the  whole  course  of 
events.  But  Nehemiah  at  once  recognised  God's  hand. 
This  perception  would  calm  him  as  he  watched  the 
solemn  movement  of  the  drama  carried  up  into  heavenly 
regions.  Then,  aided  by  the  cheering  thought  which 
came  to  him  from  the  book  of  Divine  revelation  on 
which  his  prayer  was  moulded,  Nehemiah  turns  to  the 
covenant-keeping  mercy  of  God.  The  covenant  which 
he  appeals  to  here  must  be  that  of  the  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy ;  his  subsequent  references  to  the  contents  of 
that  book  make  this  quite  clear. 

It  is  important  to  see  that  Nehemiah  recognises  the 
relation  of  God's  mercy  to  His  covenant.  He  perceives 
that  the  two  go  together,  that  the  covenant  does  not 
dispense  with  the  need  of  mercy  any  more  than  it  fore- 
closes the  action  of  mercy.  When  the  covenant  people 
fall  into  sin,  they  cannot  claim  forgiveness  as  a  right ; 
nor  can  they  ever  demand  deliverance  from  trouble 
on    the    ground   of  their  pact  with    God.       God  does 

*  Neh.  i.  5.     See  Deut.  vii.  9. 


Nch .  i .  4- 1 1 .  ]  NEHEMIAirS  PR  A  YER.  1 79 

not  bargain  with  His  children.  A  Divine  covenant  is 
not  a  business  arrangement,  the  terms  of  w^hich  can 
be  interpreted  like  those  of  a  deed  of  partnership,  and 
put  into  force  by  the  determinate  will  of  either  party. 
The  covenant  is,  from  the  first,  a  gracious  Divine  pro- 
mise and  dispensation,  conditioned  by  certain  require- 
ments to  be  observed  on  man's  side.  Its  very  existence 
is  a  fruit  of  God's  mercy,  not  an  outcome  of  man's 
haggling,  and  its  operation  is  just  through  the  con- 
tinuance of  that  mercy.  It  is  true  a  promise,  a  sort  of 
pledge,  goes  with  the  covenant ;  but  that  is  a  promise 
of  mercy,  a  pledge  of  grace.  It  does  not  dispense  with 
the  mercy  of  God  by  converting  what  would  otherwise 
be  an  act  of  pure  grace  on  His  part  into  a  right  which 
we  possess  and  act  upon  of  our  own  sole  will.  What 
it  does  is  to  afford  a  channel  for  the  mercy  of  God,  and 
to  assure  us  of  His  mercy,  which,  however,  re-mains 
mercy  throughout. 

From  another  point  of  view  the  covenant  and  the 
mercy  go  together.  The  mercy  follows  the  covenant. 
The  expression  "  the  uncovenanted  mercies  of  God " 
has  been  used  in  bitter  irony,  as  though  any  hope  that 
depended  on  such  mercies  was  poor  indeed,  a  bare 
refuge  of  despair.  But  so  to  treat  the  unknown  good- 
ness of  God  is  to  discredit  that  "  ceaseless,  unexhausted 
love"  which  has  given  us  the  latest  and  highest  and 
best  name  of  God.  We  do  not  know  how  far  the  vast 
ocean  of  the  lovingkindness  of  God  extends.  On  the 
other  hand,  certain  definite  assurances  of  mercy  are 
given  along  the  lines  of  a  covenant.  Therefore  it  is 
clearly  wise  and  right  for  people  who  possess  the 
covenant  to  follow  those  lines.  Other  people  who  are 
outside  the  covenant  may  meet  with  wonderful  sur- 
prises in  the  infinite  Fatherhood  of  God  ;  but  those  of 


i8o  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

His  children  who  are  in  the  home  must  expect  to  be 
treated  according  to  the  established  order  of  the  house. 
No  doubt  they  too  will  have  their  grand  surprises  of 
Divine  grace,  for  God  does  not  tie  Himself  to  forms  and 
rules  at  home  while  He  exercises  liberty  abroad.  To 
do  so  would  be  to  make  the  home  a  prison.  But  still 
His  revelation  of  methods  of  grace  is  a  clear  indication 
that  it  is  our  duty  to  observe  those  methods,  and  that 
we  have  no  ground  of  complaint  if  we  do  not  receive 
the  grace  we  seek  when  we  wilfully  neglect  them. 
Here  then  we  see  the  necessity  of  studying  the  revela- 
tion of  the  will  and  mind  of  God.  That  prayer  has 
most  ground  of  hope  in  it  which  keeps  nearest  to  the 
thought  and  spirit  of  Scripture. 

The  terms  of  the  covenant  quoted  by  Nehemiah 
require  obedience  on  the  part  of  those  who  would 
receive  mercy  under  it,  and  this  obedience  is  needed  in 
those  who  are  seeking  restoration  and  forgiveness  as 
well  as  in  those  who  have  not  fallen  from  the  covenant 
throughout.  The  reference  to  *'  mercy "  makes  that 
clear.  The  penitent  submits,  and  in  the  surrender  of 
his  will  he  is  made  the  recipient  of  the  Divine  mercy. 
But  behind  the  obedience  is  the  spirit  of  love  that 
prompts  it.  The  mercy  is  for  them  that  love  God  and 
observe  His  commandments.  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the 
law  from  the  first.  It  is  expected  in  the  Old  Testament 
as  well  as  in  the  New  ;  it  is  prescribed  by  the  Deuter- 
onomist  as  decidedly  as  by  St.  John,  for  it  is  the  only 
ground  of  real  obedience.  The  slavish  terror  of  the 
lash  which  squeezes  out  a  reluctant  utterance  of  sub- 
mission will  not  open  the  door  for  the  mercy  of  God. 
The  Divine  covenant  secures  mercy  only  for  those  who 
return  to  their  allegiance  in  a  spirit  of  love. 

Having  thus  set  forth  the  grounds  of  his  prayer  in 


Neh.  i.  4- 1 1 .]  NEHEMIAH  S  PR  A  YER.  1 8 1 


his  address  to  God  and  his  plea  of  the  covenant,  Nehe- 
miah  proceeds  to  invoke  the  Divine  attention  to  his 
petition.  There  is  an  echo  of  the  courtier,  perhaps,  in 
his  request  that  God's  ear  should  be  attentive  and  His 
eyes  open  ;  *  but  his  whole  conduct  forbids  the  idea 
of  servile  obsequiousness.  His  prayer,  he  here  says, 
is  offered  "  day  and  night "  ;  so  his  report  of  it  may  be 
regarded  as  a  sort  of  final  summing  up  of  a  long, 
persevering  succession  of  prayers.  The  unwearying 
persistence  of  the  man  reveals  two  favourable  features 
in  his  character — his  earnestness  of  purpose  and  his 
unflagging  faith.  Our  Lord  denounces  "vain  repe- 
titions "  t — i'C.,  repetitions  the  very  value  of  which  is 
thought  to  reside  in  their  number,  as  though  prayer 
could  be  estimated  arithmetically.  But  the  prayer 
that  is  repeated  simply  because  the  worshipper  is  too 
persistent  to  be  satisfied  till  it  is  answered  does  not 
come  into  the  category  of  "  vain  repetitions  "  ;  it  is 
anything  but  empty. 

Immediately  after  his  invocation  of  God's  gracious 
attention  Nehemiah  plunges  into  a  confession  of  sin. 
Ezra's  great  pra3^er  was  wholly  occupied  with  confession,  t 
and  this  mournful  exercise  takes  a  large  place  in  Nehe- 
miah's  prayer.  But  the  younger  man  has  one  special 
ground  of  confession.  The  startling  news  of  the  ruinous 
condition  of  the  recently  restored  city  of  Jerusalem 
rouses  a  sort  of  national  conscience  in  his  breast.  He 
knows  that  the  captivity  was  brought  about  as  a  chas- 
tisement for  the  sins  of  the  Jews.  That  great  lesson 
— so  recklessly  ignored  when  it  was  insisted  on  by 
Jeremiah — had  been  burnt  into  the  deepest  convic- 
tions  of    the  exiles.       Therefore  Nehemiah  makes  no 


Neh.  i.  6.  f  ^^^^t.  vi.^7.  J  Ezra  ix.  6-15. 


1 82  EZRA,  N EH  EM  I  AH,  AND  ESTHER. 

complaint  of  the  cruel  behaviour  of  the  enemies  of  Israel. 
He  does  not  whine  about  the  pitiable  plight  of  the 
Jews.  Their  real  enemies  were  their  sins,  and  the 
explanation  of  their  present  distress  was  to  be  found 
in  their  own  bad  conduct.  Thus  Nehemiah  goes  to 
the  root  of  the  matter,  and  that  without  a  moment's 
hesitation. 

Further,  it  is  interesting  to  see  how  he  identifies 
himself  with  his  people  in  this  confession.  Living  far 
from  the  seat  of  the  evil,  himself  a  God-fearing,  up- 
right man,  he  might  have  been  tempted  to  treat  the 
citizens  of  Jerusalem  as  Job's  comforters  treated 
the  patriarch  of  Uz,  and  denounce  their  sins  from 
the  secure  heights  of  his  own  virtue.  In  decHning 
to  assume  this  pharisaic  attitude,  Nehemiah  shows  that 
he  is  not  thinking  of  recent  specific  sins  committed 
by  the  returned  exiles.  The  whole  history  of  Israel's 
apostasy  is  before  him ;  he  feels  that  the  later  as  truly 
as  the  earlier  calamities  flow  from  this  one  deep,  foul 
fountain  of  iniquity.  Thus  he  can  join  himself  with 
his  fathers  and  the  whole  nation  in  the  utterance  of 
confession.  This  is  different  from  the  confession  of 
Ezra,  who  was  thinking  of  one  definite  sin  which  he 
did  not  share,  but  which  he  confessed  in  a  priestly 
sympathy.  Nehemiah  is  less  concerned  with  formal 
legal  precepts.  He  is  more  profoundly  moved  by  the 
wide  and  deep  course  of  his  people's  sin  generally. 
Still  it  is  a  mark  of  self-knowledge  and  true  humility,  as 
well  as  of  patriotism,  that  he  honestly  associates  himself 
with  his  fellow-countrymen.  He  perceives  that  par- 
ticular sins,  such  as  those  found  in  the  recent  miscon- 
duct of  the  Jews,  are  but  symptoms  of  the  underlying 
sinful  character;  and  that  while  circumstances  may 
save  the  individual  from  the  temptation  to  exhibit  every 


Nell.  i.  4-1 1.]  NEHEMIAirS  PRAYER.  183 


one  of  these  symptoms,  they  are  accidental,  and  they 
cannot  be  set  to  his  credit.  The  common  sin  is  in  him 
still ;  therefore  he  may  well  join  himself  to  the  penitents, 
even  though  he  has  not  participated  in  all  their  evil 
deeds.  The  solidarity  of  the  race  is,  unhappily,  never 
more  apparent  than  in  its  sin.  This  sin  is  especially  the 
"  one  touch  oV^  fallen  "  nature  "  that  "  makes  the  whole 
world  kin."  It  was  to  a  trait  of  frailty  that  Shakespeare 
was  alluding  when  he  coined  his  famous  phrase,  as  the 
context  proves.*  The  trail  of  the  serpent  is  over  every 
human  life,  and  in  this  ugly  mark  we  have  a  terrible  sign 
of  human  brotherhood.  Of  all  the  elements  of  "  Common 
Prayer,"  confession  can  be  most  perfectly  shared  by 
every  member  of  a  congregation,  if  only  all  the  wor- 
shippers are  in  earnest  and  know  their  own  hearts. 

Nehemiah  does  not  enter  much  into  detail  with  this 
confession.  It  is  sweeping  and  widely  comprehensive. 
Two  points,  however,  may  be  noticed.  First,  he  refers 
to  the  Godward  aspect  of  sin,  its  personal  character  as 
an  offence  against  God.  Thus  he  says,  "  We  have  dealt 
very  corruptly  against  Theer\  So  the  prodigal  first 
confesses  that  he  has  sinned  "  against  heaven."  { 
Secondly,  he  makes  mention  more  than  once  of  the 
commandments  of  Moses.  The  name  of  Moses  is  often 
appealed  to  with  reverence  in  the  history  of  this  period 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  Evidently  the  minds  of  men 
reverted  to  the  great  founder  of  the  nation  at  the  time 
of  national  penitence  and  restoration.  Under  these 
circumstances  no  new  edition  of  The  Law  could  have 
been  adopted  unless  it  was  believed  to  have  embodied 
the  substance  of  the  older  teaching. 


Troilus  and  Cressida,  Act  iii.,  Scene  3.  f  Neh.  i.  7 

\  Luke  XV.  18. 


i84  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  \ESTHER. 


After  his  confession  Nehemiah  goes  on  to  appeal  to 
the  Divine  promises  of  restoration  made  to  the  penitent 
in  the  great  national  covenant.  He  sums  them  up  in 
a  definite  sentence,  not  quoting  any  one  utterance  of 
Deuteronomy,  but  gathering  together  the  various 
promises  of  mercy  and  dovetailing  almost  the  very 
language  of  them  together,  so  as  to  present  us  with  the 
total  result.  These  promises  recognise  the  possibility 
of  transgression  and  the  consequent  scattering  of  the 
people  so  often  insisted  on  by  the  prophets  and  especially 
by  Jeremiah.  They  then  go  on  to  offer  restoration  on 
condition  of  repentance  and  a  return  to  obedient 
allegiance.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  this  is  all  laid  dov^^n 
on  national  lines.  The  nation  sins ;  the  nation  suffers ; 
the  nation  is  restored  to  its  old  home.  This  is  very 
much  a  characteristic  of  Judaism,  and  it  gives  a  breadth 
to  the  operation  of  great  religious  principles  which 
would  otherwise  be  unattainable  when  almost  all  regard 
for  a  future  life  is  left  out  of  account.  Christianity 
dwells  more  on  individualism,  but  it  obtains  space  at 
once  by  bringing  the  future  life  into  prominence.  In 
the  Old  Testament  the  future  of  the  nation  takes  much 
the  same  place  as  that  occupied  by  the  future  of  the 
individual  in  the  Nev/  Testament. 

In  reviewing  the  history  of  God's  way  with  Israel 
Nehemiah  lays  his  finger  on  the  great  fact  of  redemption. 
The  Jews  are  the  ''  people  whom  God  had  redeemed  by 
His  great  power  and  His  strong  hand."*  Universal 
usage  compels  us  to  fix  upon  the  exodus  under  Moses, 
and  not  Zerubbabel's  pilgrimage,  as  the  event  to  which 
Nehemiah  here  alludes.  That  event,  which  was  the 
birth  of  the  nation,  always  comes  out  in  Hebrew  litera- 


*  Neh.  i.  10. 


Nch .  i .  4- 1 1 .  ]  NEHEMIAH'S  PR  A  YER.  1 85 

ture  as  the  supreme  act  of  Divine  grace.  In  some 
respects  its  position  in  the  religion  of  Israel  may  be 
likened  to  that  of  the  cross  of  Christ  in  Christianity. 
In  both  cases  God's  great  work  of  redeeming  His 
children  is  the  supreme  proof  of  His  mercy  and  the 
grand  source  of  assurance  in  praying  to  Him  for  new 
help.  On  the  ground  of  the  great  redemption  Nehemiah 
advances  to  the  special  petition  with  which  his  prayer 
closes.  This  is  most  definite.  It  is  on  behalf  of  his 
own  need  ;  it  is  for  immediate  help — "  this  day  "  ;  it  is 
for  one  particular  need — in  his  proposed  approach  to 
Artaxerxes  to  plead  the  cause  of  his  people.  Here 
then  is  an  instance  of  the  most  special  prayer.  It  is 
^*to  the  point,"  and  for  most  pressing  present  require- 
ments. We  cannot  but  be  struck  with  the  reality  of 
such  a  prayer.  Having  reached  this  definite  petition 
Nehemiah  closes  abruptly. 

When  we  glance  back  over  the  prayer  as  a  whole, 
we  are  struck  with  its  order  and  progress.  As  in  our 
Lord's  model  prayer,  the  first  part  is  absorbed  with 
thoughts  of  God ;  it  is  after  uplifting  his  thoughts  to 
heaven  that  the  worshipper  comes  down  to  human 
need.  Then  a  large  place  is  given  to  sin.  This  comes 
first  in  the  consideration  of  man  after  the  worshipper 
has  turned  his  eyes  from  the  contemplation  of  God  and 
felt  the  contrast  of  darkness  after  light.  Lastly,  the 
human  subjects  of  the  prayer  begin  in  the  wider  circle 
of  the  whole  nation  ;  only  at  the  very  last,  in  little  more 
than  a  sentence,  Nehemiah  brings  forward  his  own 
personal  petition.  Thus  the  prayer  gradusllj'  narrows 
down  from  the  Divine  to  the  human,  and  from  the 
national  to  the  individual :  as  it  narrows  it  becomes  more 
definite,  till  it  ends  in  a  single  point ;  but  this  point  is 
driven  home  by  the  weight  and  force  of  all  that  precedes. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

THE  PRAYER  ANSWERED. 
Nehemiah  ii.  1-8. 

NEHEMIAH'S  prayer  had  commenced  on  celestial 
heights  of  meditation  among  thoughts  of  Divine 
grace  and  glory,  and  when  it  had  stooped  to  earth  it 
had  swept  over  the  wide  course  of  his  nation's  history 
and  poured  out  a  confession  of  the  whole  people's  sin  ' 
but  the  final  point  of  it  was  a  definite  request  for  ' 
prospering  of  his  contemplated  interview  with  the 
Artaxerxes  was  an   absolute  despot,  surroun^' 
the  semi-divine  honours  that  Orientals  as"^  ...i 

the  regal  state,  and  yet  in  speaking  r  nim  before 
^'  the  God  of  heaven,"  *'  the  great  ar  errible  God," 
Nehemiah  loses   all   awe  for  his  v  :    pomp,   and 

describes  him  boldly  as  "  this  m?-  the  supreme 

splendour  of  God's  presence  all  •  fades  out  of 

the  worshipper's  sight,  like  '  s  spark  lost  in 

the  sunlight.     Therefore  r  aazzled  by  human 

magnificence  so  long  ?  vvai        a  the  light  of  God. 

W^r<-     hr^wever,   N'  is  speaking  of  an   absent 

*\Y  it  is  '^   0     ang  to  be  fearless  of  man  when 
-^  wiT"^'  C      -n  the  seclusion  of  one's  own  chamber, 
and  quite  anoth^  •;  to  be  equally  imperturbable  in  the 


-•*  Neh.  i. 
••••.-'  i86 


Nell.  ii.  1-8.]  THE  PRAYER  ANSWERED.  187 

world  and  away  from  the  calming  influence  of  undis- 
turbed communion  with  Heaven.  We  must  remember 
this  if  we  would  do  justice  to  Nehemiah,  because 
otherwise  we  might  be  surprised  that  his  subsequent 
action  did  not  show  all  the  courage  we  should  have 
expected. 

Four  months  passed  away  before  Nehemiah  at- 
tempted anything  on  behalf  of  the  city  of  his  fathers. 
The  Jewish  travellers  probably  thought  that  their  visit 
to  the  court  servant  had  been  barren  of  all  results. 
We  cannot  tell  how  this  interval  was  occupied,  but  it 
is  clear  that  Nehemiah  was  brooding  over  his  plans  all 
the  time,  and  inwardly  fortifying  himself  for  his  great 
undertaking.  His  ready  reply  when  he  was  suddenly 
and  quite  unexpectedly  questioned  by  the  king  shows 
that  he  had  made  the  troubles  of  Jerusalem  a  subject 
of  anxious  thought,  and  that  he  had  come  to  a  clear 
decision  as  to  the  course  which  he  should  pursue. 
Time  spent  in  such  fruitful  thinking  is  by  no  means 
wasted.  There  is  a  hasty  sympathy  that  flashes  up  at 
the  first  sign  of  some  great  public  calamity,  eager  ''  to 
do  something,"  but  too  blind  in  its  impetuosity  to 
consider  carefully  what  ought  to  be  done  ;  and  this  is 
often  the  source  of  greater  evils,  because  it  is  incon- 
siderate. In  social  questions  especially  people  are 
tempted  to  be  misled  by  a  blind,  impatient  philan- 
thropy. The  worst  consequence  of  yielding  to  such 
an  influence — and  one  is  strongly  urged  to  jneld  for 
fear  of  seeming  cold  and  indifferent — is  that  the 
certain  disappointment  that  follows  is  likely  to  provoke 
despair  of  all  remedies,  and  to  end  in  cynical  callous- 
ness. Then,  in  the  rebound,  every  enthusiastic  effort 
for  the  public  good  is  dcspised^_^^^u>-+JTiy'^55^^fi"844i^  of 
sentimentality. 


^^♦/e^irs^s^^^: 


EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


Very  possibly  Nehemiah  had  no  opportunity  of 
speaking  to  the  king  during  these  four  months.  A 
Persian  sovereign  was  waited  on  by  several  cup- 
bearers, and  it  is  likely  enough  that  Nehemiah's  terms 
of  service  were  intermittent.  On  his  return  to  the 
court  in  due  course  he  may  have  had  the  first  occasion 
for  presenting  his  petition.  Still  it  is  not  to  be  denied 
that  he  found  great  difficulty  in  bringing  himself  to 
utter  it,  and  then  only  when  it  was  dragged  out  of 
him  by  the  king.  It  was  a  petition  of  no  common  kind. 
To  request  permission  to  leave  the  court  might  be 
misconstrued  unfavourably.  Herodotus  says  that 
people  had  been  put  to  death  both  by  Darius  and  by 
Xerxes  for  showing  reluctance  to  accompany  their  king. 
Then  had  not  this  very  Artaxerxes  sanctioned  the 
raid  upon  Jerusalem  which  had  resulted  in  the  de- 
vastation which  Nehemiah  deplored  and  which  he 
desired  to  see  reversed  ?  If  the  king  remembered  his 
rescript  to  the  Syrian  governors,  might  he  not  regard 
a  proposal  for  the  reversal  of  its  policy  as  a  piece  of 
unwarrantable  impertinence  on  the  part  of  his  house- 
hold slave — nay,  as  an  indication  of  treasonable  designs  ? 
All  this  would  be  apparent  enough  to  Nehemiah  as  he 
handed  the  wine-cup  on  bended  knee  to  the  Great 
King.  Is  it  wonderful  then  that  he  hesitated  to  speak, 
or  that  he  was  ^'  very  sore  afraid "  when  the  king 
questioned  him  about  his  sadness  of  countenance  ? 

There  is  an  apparent  contradiction  in  Nehemiah's 
statement  concerning  this  sad  appearance  of  his  counte- 
nance which  is  obscured  in  our  EngUsh  translation  by 
the  unwarrantable  insertion  of  the  word  "  beforetime  " 
in  Nehemiah  ii.  i,  so  that  the  sentence  reads,  "  Now  1 
had  not  been  beforetime  sad  in  his  presence."  This 
word  is  a  gloss  of  the  translators.     What  Nehemiah 


Nch.  ii.  i-S.]  THE  PRAYER   ANSWERED.  1S9 


really  says  is  simply,  "  Now  I  had  not  been  sad  in  his 
presence " — a  statement  that  evidently  refers  to  the 
occasion  then  being  described,  and  not  to  previous 
times  nor  to  the  cup-bearer's  habitual  bearing.  Yet  in 
the  very  next  sentence  we  read  how  the  king  asked 
Nehemiah  the  reason  for  the  sadness  of  his  counte- 
nance. The  contradiction  would  be  as  apparent  to 
the  writer  as  it  is  to  us;  and  if  he  left  it  Nehemiah 
meant  it  to  stand,  no  doubt  intending  to  suggest  by  a 
dramatic  description  of  the  scene  that  he  attempted  to 
disguise  his  sorrow,  but  that  his  attempt  was  in- 
effectual— so  strong,  so  marked  was  his  grief.  It  was 
a  rule  of  the  court  etiquette,  apparently,  that  nobody 
should  be  sad  in  the  king's  presence.  A  gloomy  face 
would  be  unpleasant  to  the  monarch.  Shakespeare's 
Caesar  knew  the  security  of  cheerful  associates  when 
he  said: — 

"  Let  me  have  men  about  me  that  are  fat ; 
Sleek-headed  men,  and  such  as  sleep  o'  nights : 
Yond'  Cassius  has  a  lean  and  hungry  look  ; 
He  thinks  too  much  ;  such  men  are  dangerous." 

Besides,  was  not  the  sunshine  of  the  royal  countenance 
enough  to  drive  away  all  clouds  of  trouble  from  the 
minds  of  his  attendants  ?  Nehemiah  had  drilled 
himself  into  the  courtier's  habitual  pleasantness  of 
demeanour.  Nevertheless,  though  passing,  superficial 
signs  of  emotion  may  be  quite  reined  in  by  a  person 
who  is  trained  to  control  his  features,  indications  of  the 
permanent  conditions  of  the  inner  life  are  so  deeply  cut 
in  the  lines  and  curves  of  the  countenance  that  the 
most  consummate  art  of  an  actor  cannot  disguise  them. 
Nehemiah's  grief  was  profound  and  enduring.  There- 
fore he  could  not  hide  it.  Moreover,  it  is  a  king's 
business  to  understand  men,  and  long  practice  makes 


190  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

him  an  expert  in  it.  So  Artaxerxes  was  not  deceived 
by  the  well-arranged  smile  of  his  servant ;  it  was 
evident  to  him  that  something  very  serious  was 
troubling  the  man.  The  sickness  of  a  favourite  at- 
tendant would  not  be  unknown  to  a  kind  and  observant 
king.  Nehemiah  was  not  ill,  then.  The  source  of 
his  trouble  must  have  been  mental.  Sympathy  and 
curiosity  combined  to  urge  the  king  to  probe  the 
matter  to  the  bottom.  Though  alarmed  at  his  master's 
inquiry,  the  trembling  cup-bearer  could  not  but  give  a 
true  answer.  Here  was  his  great  opportunity — thrust 
on  him  since  he  had  not  had  the  courage  to  find  it  for 
himself.  Artaxerxes  was  not  to  be  surprised  that  a  man 
should  grieve  when  the  city  of  his  ancestors  was  lying 
desolate.  But  this  information  did  not  satisfy  the 
king.  His  keen  eye  saw  that  there  was  more  behind. 
Nehemiah  had  some  request  which  as  yet  he  had  not 
been  daring  enough  to  utter.  With  real  kindness 
•Artaxerxes  invited  him  to  declare  it. 

The  critical  moment  had  arrived.  How  much  hangs 
upon  the  next  sentence — not  the  continuance  of  the 
royal  favour  only,  but  perhaps  the  very  life  of  the 
speaker,  and,  what  is  of  far  more  value  to  a  patriot,  the 
future  destiny  of  his  people  !  Nehemiah's  perception  of 
its  intense  importance  is  apparent  in  the  brief  state- 
ment which  he  here  inserts  in  his  narrative  :  '^  So  I 
prayed  to  the  God  of  heaven."  *  He  is  accustomed  to 
drop  in  suggestive  notes  on  his  own  private  feelings 
and  behaviour  along  the  course  of  his  narrative.  Only 
a  few  lines  earlier  we  came  upon  one  of  these  character- 
istic autobiographical  touches  in  the  words,  '*  Now  I 
had  not  been  sad  in  his  presence,"  f  soon  followed  by 

*  Neh.  ii,  4.  f  Neh.  ii.  i. 


Neh.  ii.  1-8.]  THE  PRAYER  ANSWERED.  191 

another,  "Then  I  was  very  sore  afraid."*  Such  re- 
marks vivify  the  narrative,  and  keep  up  an  interest  in 
the  writer.  In  the  present  case  the  interjection  is 
peculiarly  suggestive.  It  was  natural  that  Nehemiah 
should  be  startled  at  the  king's  abrupt  question,  but  it 
is  an  indication  of  his  devout  nature  that  as  the  crisis 
intensified  his  fear  passed  over  into  prayer.  This  was 
not  a  set  season  of  prayer ;  the  pious  Jew  was  not  in 
his  temple,  nor  at  any  proseiiche;  there  was  no  time  for 
a  full,  elaborate,  and  orderly  utterance,  such  as  that 
previously  recorded.  Just  at  the  moment  of  need,  in 
the  very  presence  of  the  king,  with  no  time  to  spare, 
by  a  flash  of  thought,  Nehemiah  retires  to  that  most 
lonely  of  all  lonely  places,  "  the  inner  city  of  the 
mind,"  there  to  seek  the  help  of  the  Unseen  God.  And 
it  is  enough  :  the  answer  is  as  swift  as  the  prayer ;  in 
a  moment  the  weak  man  is  made  strong  for  his  great 
effort. 

Such  a  sudden  uplifting  of  the  soul  to  God  is  the 
most  real  of  all  prayers.  This  at  least  is  genuine  and 
heartfelt,  whatever  may  be  the  case  with  the  semi- 
liturgical  composition  the  thought  and  beauty  of  which 
engaged  our  attention  in  the  previous  chapter.  But 
then  the  man  who  can  thus  find  God  in  a  moment  must 
be  in  the  habit  of  frequently  resorting  to  the  Divine 
Presence  ;  like  the  patriarchs,  he  must  be  walking  with 
God.  The  brief  and  sudden  prayer  reaches  heaven  as 
an  arrow  suddenly  shot  from  the  bow  ;  but  it  goes  right 
home,  because  he  who  lets  it  off  in  his  surprise  is  a 
good  marksman,  well  practised.  This  ready  prayer 
only  springs  to  the  lips  of  a  man  who  lives  in  a  daily 
habit   of  praying.     We  must  associate  the  two  kinds 

*  Nell,  ii.  2. 


192       EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

of  prayer  in  order  to  account  for  that  which  is  now 
before  us.  The  dehberate  exercises  of  adoration,  con- 
fession, and  petition  prepare  for  the  one  sudden  ejacu- 
lation. There  we  see  the  deep  river  which  suppKes 
the  sea  of  devotion  from  which  the  momentary  prayer 
is  cast  up  as  the  spray  of  a  wave.  Therefore  it  was  in 
a  great  measure  on  account  of  his  dehberate  and  un- 
wearying daily  prayers  that  Nehemiah  was  prepared 
with  his  quick  cry  to  God  in  the  crisis  of  need.  We 
may  compare  his  two  kinds  of  prayer  with  our  Lord's 
full  and  calm  intercession  in  John  xvii.  and  the  short 
agonised  cry  from  the  cross.  In  each  case  we  feel 
that  the  sudden  appeal  to  God  in  the  moment  of  dire 
necessity  is  the  most  intense  and  penetrating  prayer. 
Still  we  must  recognise  that  this  comes  from  a  man 
who  is  much  in  prayer.  The  truth  is  that  beneath 
both  of  these  prayers — the  calm,  meditative  utterance, 
and  the  simple  cry  for  help — there  lies  the  deep, 
true  essence  of  prayer,  which  is  no  thing  of  words  at 
all,  but  which  lives  on,  even  when  it  is  voiceless,  in  the 
heart  of  one  of  whom  it  can  be  said,  as  Tennyson 
says  of  Mary, — 

"Her  eyes  are  homes  of  silent  prayer." 

Fortified  by  his  moment's  communion  with  God, 
Nehemiah  now  makes  known  his  request.  He  asks  to 
be  sent  to  Jerusalem  to  repair  its  ruins  and  fortify  the 
city.  This  petition  contains  more  than  lies  on  the  surface 
of  the  words.  Nehemiah  does  not  say  that  he  wishes 
to  be  appointed  Governor  of  Jerusalem  in  the  high 
office  which  had  been  held  by  Zerubbabel,  but  the  sub-  * 
sequent  narrative  shows  that  he  was  assigned  to  this 
position,  and  his  report  of  the  king's  orders  about  the 
house  he  was  to  dwell  in  at  Jerusalem  almost  implies 


Nch.  ii.  1-8.]  THE  PRAYER  ANSWERED.  193 


as  much.*  For  one  of  the  royal  household  servants  to 
be  appointed  to  such  a  position  was  doubtless  not  so 
strange  an  anomaly  in  the  East  in  Nehemiah's  day, 
as  it  would  be  with  us  now.  The  king's  will  was  the 
fountain  of  all  honour,  and  the  seclusion  in  which  the 
Persian  monarchs  lived  gave  unusual  opportunities 
for  the  few  personal  attendants  who  were  admitted  into 
their  presence  to  obtain  great  favours  from  them.  Still 
Nehemiah's  attitude  seems  to  show  some  self-confidence 
in  a  young  man  not  as  yet  holding  any  political  office. 
Two  or  three  considerations,  however,  will  give  a  very 
different  complexion  to  his  request.  In  the  first  place, 
his  city  was  in  a  desperate  plight  :  deliverance  was 
urgently  needed ;  no  help  appeared  to  be  forthcoming 
unless  he  stepped  into  the  breach.  If  he  failed,  things 
could  hardly  become  worse  than  they  were  already. 
Was  this  an  occasion  when  a  man  should  hold  back 
from  a  sense  of  modesty  ?  There  is  a  false  modesty 
which  is  really  a  product  of  the  self-consciousness  that  is 
next  door  to  vanity.  The  man  who  is  entirely  oblivious 
of  self  will  sometimes  forget  to  be  modest.  Moreover, 
Nehemiah's  request  was  at  the  peril  of  his  life.  When 
it  was  granted  he  would  be  launched  on  a  most  hazard- 
ous undertaking.  The  ambition — if  we  must  use  the 
word — which  would  covet  such  a  career  is  at  the  very 
antipodes  of  that  of  the  vulgar  adventurer  who  simply 
seeks  power  in  order  to  gratify  his  own  sense  of  im- 
portance. "  Seekest  thou  great  things  for  thyself? 
seek  thern  not."  f  That  humbling  rebuke  may  be 
needed  by  many  men  ;  but  it  was  not  needed  by 
Nehemiah,  for  he  was  not  seeking  the  great  things 
for  himself. 

*  Neh.  ii.  8.  f  Jer.  xlv.  5. 

13 


194  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


It  was  a  daring  request ;  yet  the  king  received  it 
most  favourably.  Again,  then,  we  have  the  pleasing 
spectacle  of  a  Persian  monarch  showing  kindness  to 
the  Jews.  This  is  not  the  first  time  that  Artaxerxes 
has  proved  himself  their  friend,  for  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  he  is  the  same  sovereign  as  the  Artaxerxes 
who  despatched  Ezra  with  substantial  presents  to  the 
aid  of  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem  some  twelve  or  thirteen 
years  before. 

Here,  however,  a  Httle  difficulty  emerges.  In  the 
interval  between  the  mission  of  Ezra  and  that  of 
Nehemiah  an  adverse  decree  had  been  extracted  from 
the  compliant  sovereign — the  decree  referred  to  in  Ezra 
iv.  Now  the  semi-divinity  that  was  ascribed  to  a 
Persian  monarch  involved  the  fiction  of  infallibility, 
and  this  was  maintained  by  a  rule  making  it  unconstitu- 
tional for  him  to  withdraw  any  command  that  he  had 
once  issued.  How  then  could  Artaxerxes  now  sanction 
the  building  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem,  which  but  a 
few  years  before  he  had  expressly  forbidden  ?  The 
difficulty  vanishes  on  a  very  little  consideration.  The 
king's  present  action  was  not  the  withdrawal  of  his 
earlier  decree,  for  the  royal  order  to  the  Samaritans 
had  been  just  to  the  effect  that  the  building  of  the  walls 
of  Jerusalem  should  be  stopped.*  This  order  had  been 
fully  executed ;  moreover  it  contained  the  significant 
words,  '^  until  another  decree  shall  be  made  by  me."  f 
Therefore  a  subsequent  permission  to  resume  the  work, 
issued  under  totally  different  circumstances,  would 
not  be  a  contradiction  to  the  earher  order;  and  now 
that  a  trusty  servant  of  the  king  was  to  superintend 
the    operations,    no    danger    of    insurrection    need    be 

*  Ezra  iv.  21.  f  Ibid. 


Neh.  ii.  1-8.]  THE  PRAYER  ANSWERED.  195 


apprehended.  Then  the  pointed  notice  of  the  fact 
that  the  chief  wife — described  as  "  The  Queen  " — 
was  sitting  by  Artaxerxes,  is  evidently  intended 
to  imply  that  her  presence  helped  the  request  of 
Nehemiah.  Orientalists  have  discovered  her  name, 
Damaspia,  but  nothing  about  her  to  throw  hght  on 
her  attitude  towards  the  Jews.  She  may  have  been 
even  a  proselyte,  or  she  may  have  simply  shown  her- 
self friendly  towards  the  young  cup-bearer.  No 
political  or  religious  motives  are  assigned  for  the 
conduct  of  Artaxerxes  here.  Evidently  Nehemiah 
regarded  the  granting  of  his  request  as  a  direct 
result  of  the  royal  favour  shown  towards  himself. 
''  Put  not  your  trust  in  princes "  *  is  a  wholesome 
warning,  born  of  the  melancholy  disappointment  of 
the  pilgrims  who  had  placed  too  much  hope  in  the 
Messianic  glamour  with  which  the  career  of  poor 
Zerubbabel  opened ;  but  it  does  not  m.ean  that  a 
man  is  to  fling  away  the  advantages  which  accrue  to 
him  from  the  esteem  he  has  won  in  high  places.  Ever 
since  the  Israelites  showed  no  scruple  in  spoiling  the 
Egyptians — and  who  could  blame  them  for  seizing  at 
the  eleventh  hour  the  overdue  wages  of  which  they 
had  been  defrauded  for  generations  ? — "the  people  of 
God  "  have  not  been  slow  to  reap  harvests  of  advan- 
tage whenever  persecution  or  cold  indifference  has 
given  place  to  the  brief,  fickle  favour  of  the  world. 
Too  often  this  has  been  purchased  at  the  price 
of  the  loss  of  liberty — a  ruinous  exchange.  Here  is 
the  critical  point.  The  difficulty  is  to  accept  aid  with- 
out any  compromise  of  principle.  Sycophancy  is  the 
besetting  snare   of  the  courtier,  and  when  the  Church 

J  Psalm  cxlvi.  3. 


196  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


turns  courtier  she  is  in  imminent  danger  of  that,  in 
her,  most  fatal  fault.  But  Nehemiah  affords  a  splendid 
example  to  the  contrary.  In  his  grand  independence 
of  character  we  have  a  fine  instance  of  a  wise,  strong 
use  of  worldly  advantages,  entirely  free  from  the 
abuses  that  too  commonly  accompany  them.  Thus 
he  anticipates  the  idea  of  the  Apocalypse  where  it 
is  said,  "  The  earth  helped  the  woman."  * 

The  interest  of  the  king  in  his  cup-bearer  is  shown 
by  his  repeated  questions,  and  by  the  determined  manner 
in  which  he  drags  out  of  Nehemiah  all  his  plans  and 
wishes.  Ever}^  request  is  granted.  The  favourite 
servant  is  too  much  valued  to  get  his  leave  of  absence 
without  some  limit  of  time,  but  even  that  is  fixed  in 
accordance  with  Nehemiah's  desire.  He  asks  and 
obtains  letters  of  introduction  to  the  governors  west  of 
the  Euphrates.  The  letters  were  most  necessary,  be- 
cause these  very  men  had  bestirred  themselves  to  obtain 
the  adverse  decree  but  a  very  few  years  before.  It  is 
not  likely  that  they  had  all  veered  round  to  favour  the 
hated  people  against  whom  they  had  just  been  ex- 
hibiting the  most  severe  antagonism.  Nehemiah  there- 
fore showed  a  wise  caution  in  obtaining  a  sort  of  "  safe 
conduct."  The  friendliness  of  Artaxerxes  went  still 
further.  The  king  ordered  timber  to  be  provided  for 
the  building  and  fortifying  operations  contemplated  by 
his  cup-bearer ;  this  was  to  be  furnished  from  a  royal 
hunting  park — a  **  Paradise,"  to  use  the  Persian  word 
— probably  one  which  formerly  belonged  to  the  royal 
demesne  of  Judah,  somewhere  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Jerusalem,  as  the  head-forester  bore  a  Hebrew  name, 
''Asaph."  t     Costly   cedars   for  the   temple  had  to  be 


*  Rev.  xii.  i6.  f  Neh.  ii.  8. 


Neh.  ii.  1-8.]  THE  PRAYER  ANSWERED.  197 


fetched  all  the  way  from  the  distant  mountians  of 
Lebanon,  in  Phoenician  territory ;  but  the  city  gates 
and  the  castle  and  house  carpentry  could  be  well 
supplied  from  the  oaks  and  other  indigenous  timber  of 
Palestine. 

All  these  details  evince  the  practical  nature  of 
Nehemiah's  patriotism.  His  last  word  on  the  happy 
conclusion  of  the  interview  with  Artaxerxes,  which  he 
had  anticipated  with  so  much  apprehension,  shows 
that  higher  thoughts  were  not  crushed  out  by  the 
anxious  consideration  of  external  affairs.  He  concludes 
with  a  striking  phrase,  which  we  have  met  with  earlier 
on  the  lips  of  Ezra.*  **  And  the  king  granted  me, 
according  to  the  good  hand  of  my  God  upon  meT  \  Here 
is  the  same  recognition  of  Divine  Providence,  and  the 
same  graphic  image  of  the  ''  hand  "  of  God  laid  on  the 
writer.  It  looks  as  though  the  younger  man  had  been 
already  a  disciple  of  the  Great  Scribe.  But  his  utter- 
ance is  not  the  less  genuine  and  heartfelt  on  that 
account.  He  perceives  that  his  prayer  has  been  heard 
and  answered.  The  strength  and  beauty  of  his  life 
throughout  may  be  seen  in  his  constant  reference  of 
all  things  to  God  in  trust  and  prayer  before  the  event, 
and  in  grateful  acknowledgment  afterwards. 

*  Ezra  vii.  28.  f  Neh.  ii.  8. 


CHAPTER   XVIII. 

THE    MIDNIGHT   RIDE. 

Nehemiah  ii.  9-20. 

NEHEMIAH'S  journey  up  to  Jerusalem  differed  in 
many  respects  from  Ezra's  great  expedition,  with 
a  host  of  emigrants,  rich  stores,  and  all  the  accompani- 
ments of  a  large  caravan.  Burdened  with  none  of  these 
encumbrances,  the  newly  appointed  governor  would  be 
able  to  travel  in  comparative  ease.  Yet  while  Ezra  was 
''  ashamed  "  to  ask  for  a  military  escort  to  protect  his 
defenceless  multitude  and  the  treasures  which  were 
only  too  likely  to  attract  the  vulture  eyes  of  roving 
hordes  of  Bedouin,  because,  as  he  tells  us,  he  feared 
such  a  request  might  be  taken  as  a  sign  of  distrust  in 
his  God,  Nehemiah  accepted  a  troop  of  cavalry  without 
any  hesitation.  This  difference,  however,  does  not 
reflect  any  discredit  on  the  faith  of  the  younger  man. 

In  the  first  place,  his  claims  on  the  king  were  greater 
than  those  of  Ezra,  who  would  have  had  to  petition 
for  the  help  of  soldiers  if  he  had  wanted  it,  whereas 
Nehemiah  received  his  body-guard  as  a  matter  of 
course.  Ezra  had  been  a  private  subject  previous  to 
his  appointment,  and  though  he  had  subsequently  been 
endowed  with  large  authority  of  an  indefinite  character, 
that  authority  was  confined  to  the  execution   of  the 

Jewish  law  ;  it  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  general  con- 

198 


Neh.  ii.  9-20.]  THE  MIDNIGHT  RIDE.  I99 

cerns  of  the  Persian  government  in  Syria  or  Palestine. 
But  Nehemiah  came  straight  from  the  court,  where 
he  had  been  a  favourite  servant  of  the  king,  and  he 
was  now  made  the  official  governor  of  Jerusalem.  It 
was  only  in  accordance  with  custom  that  he  should 
have  an  escort  assigned  him  when  he  went  to  take 
possession  of  his  district.  Then,  probably  to  save  time, 
Nehemiah  would  travel  by  the  perilous  desert  route 
through  Tadmor,  and  thus  cover  the  whole  journey  in 
about  two  months — a  route  which  Ezra's  heavy  caravan 
may  have  avoided.  When  he  reached  Syria  the  fierce 
animosity  which  had  been  excited  by  Ezra's  domestic 
reformation — and  which  therefore  had  broken  out  after 
Ezra's  expedition — would  make  it  highly  dangerous  for 
a  Jew  who  Vv^as  going  to  aid  the  hated  citizens  of 
Jerusalem  to  travel  through  the  mixed  population. 

Nevertheless,  after  allowing  their  full  weight  to  these 
considerations,  may  we  not  still  detect  an  interesting 
trait  of  the  younger  man's  character  in  Nehemiah's 
ready  acceptance  of  the  guard  with  which  Ezra  had 
deliberately  dispensed  ?  In  the  eyes  of  the  world  the 
idealist  Ezra  must  have  figured  as  a  most  unpractical 
person.  But  Nehemiah,  a  courtier  by  trade,  was 
evidently  well  accustomed  to  "  affairs."  Naturally  a 
cautious  man,  he  was  always  anxious  in  his  preparations, 
though  no  one  could  blame  him  for  lack  of  decision  or 
promptness  at  the  moment  of  action.  Now  the  striking 
thing  about  his  character  in  this  relation — that  which 
lifts  it  entirely  above  the  level  of  purely  secular  prudence 
— is  the  fact  that  he  closely  associated  his  careful  habits 
with  his  faith  in  Providence.  He  would  have  regarded 
the  rashness  which  excuses  itself  on  the  plea  of  faith  as 
culpable  presumption.  His  religion  was  all  the  more 
real  and  thorough  because  it  did  not  confine  itself  to 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


unearthly  experiences,  or  refuse  to  acknowledge  the 
Divine  in  any  event  that  v^as  not  visibly  miraculous. 
No  man  was  ever  more  impressed  with  the  great  truth 
that  God  was  with  him.  It  was  this  truth,  deeply 
rooted  in  his  heart,  that  gave  him  the  joy  which  became 
the  strength,  the  very  inspiration  of  his  life.  He  was 
sure  that  his  commonest  secular  concerns  were  moulded 
by  the  hand  of  his  God.  Therefore  to  his  mind  the 
detachment  of  Persian  cavalry  was  as  truly  assigned  to 
him  by  God  as  if  it  had  been  a  troop  of  angels  sent 
straight  from  the  hosts  of  heaven. 

The  highly  dangerous  nature  of  his  undertaking  and 
the  necessity  for  exercising  the  utmost  caution  were 
apparent  to  Nehemiah  as  soon  as  he  approached 
Jerusalem.  Watchful  enemies  at  once  showed  them- 
selves annoyed  "  that  there  was  come  a  man  to  seek 
the  welfare  of  the  children  of  Israel."  *  It  was  not  any 
direct  injury  to  themselves,  it  was  the  prospect  of  some 
favour  to  the  hated  Jews  that  grieved  these  people ; 
though  doubtless  their  jealousy  was  in  part  provoked  by 
dread  lest  Jerusalem  should  regain  the  position  of  pre- 
eminence in  Palestine  which  had  been  enjoyed  during 
her  depression  by  the  rival  city  of  Samaria.  Under  these 
circum.stances  Nehemiah  followed  the  tactics  which  he 
had  doubtless  learnt  during  his  life  among  the  treacherous 
intrigues  of  an  Oriental  court.  He  did  not  at  first  reveal 
his  plans.  He  spent  three  days  quietly  in  Jerusalem. 
Then  he  took  his  famous  ride  round  the  ruins  of  the 
city  walls.  This  was  as  secret  as  King  Alfred's  explora- 
tion of  the  camp  of  the  Danes.  Without  breathing  a 
v/ord  of  his  intention  to  the  Jews,  and  taking  only  a 
horse  or  an  ass  to  ride  on  himself  and  a  small  body  of 

*  Neh.  ii.  lo. 


Neh.  ii.  9-20.]  THE  MIDNIGHT  RIDE. 


trusty  attendants  on  foot,  Nehemiah  set  out  on  his  tour 
in  the  dead  of  night.  No  doubt  the  primary  purpose  of 
this  secrecy  was  that  no  suspicion  of  his  design  should 
reach  the  enemies  of  the  Jews.  Had  these  men  sus- 
pected it  they  would  have  been  beforehand  with  their 
plans  for  frustrating  it ;  spies  and  traitors  would  have 
been  in  the  field  before  Nehemiah  was  prepared  to 
receive  them ;  emissaries  of  the  enemy  would  have 
perverted  the  minds  even  of  loyal  citizens.  It  would  be 
difficult  enough  under  any  circumstances  to  rouse  the 
dispirited  people  to  undertake  a  work  of  great  toil  and 
danger.  If  they  were  divided  in  counsel  from  the  first 
it  would  be  hopeless.  Moreover,  in  order  to  persuade 
the  Jews  to  fortify  their  city,  Nehemiah  must  be  pre- 
pared with  a  clear  and  definite  proposal.  He  must  be 
able  to  show  them  that  he  understands  exactly  in  what 
condition  their  ruined  fortifications  are  lying.  For  his 
personal  satisfaction,  too,  he  must  see  the  ruins  with 
his  own  eyes.  Ever  since  the  travellers  from  Jerusalem 
who  met  him  at  Susa  had  shocked  him  with  their  evil 
tidings,  a  vision  of  the  broken  walls  and  charred  gates 
had  been  before  his  imagination.  Now  he  would  really 
see  the  very  ruins  themselves,  and  ascertain  whether  all 
was  as  bad  as  it  had  been  represented. 

The  uncertainty  which  still  surrounds  much  of  the 
topography  of  Jerusalem,  owing  to  its  very  foundations 
having  been  turned  over  by  the  ploughshare  of  the 
invader,  while  some  of  its  sacred  sites  have  been  buried 
under  huge  mounds  of  rubbish,  renders  it  impossible 
to  trace  Nehemiah's  night  ride  in  all  its  details.  If  we 
are  to  accept  the  latest  theory,  according  to  which  the 
gorge  hitherto  regarded  as  the  Tyropccon  is  really 
the  ancient  Valley  of  Hinnom,  some  other  sites  will 
need   considerable   readjustment.     The    "  Gate    of   the 


202  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


Valley "  seems  to  be  one  near  the  head  of  the  Valley 
of  Hinnom  ;  we  know  nothing  of  the  "  Dragon  Well  "  ; 
the  "  Dung  Port "  would  be  a  gateway  through  which 
the  city  offal  was  flung  out  to  the  fires  in  the  Valley  of 
Hinnom ;  the  ''  King's  Pool "  is  very  likely  that  after- 
wards known  as  the  *'  Pool  of  Siloam."  The  main  direc- 
tion of  Nehemiah's  tour  of  inspection  is  fairly  definite 
to  us.  He  started  at  the  western  exit  from  the  city 
and  passed  down  to  the  left,  to  where  the  Valley  of 
Hinnom  joins  the  Valley  of  the  Kidron  ;  ascending  this 
valley,  he  found  the  masses  of  stones  and  heaps  of 
rubbish  in  such  confusion  that  he  was  compelled  to 
leave  the  animal  he  had  been  riding  hitherto  and  to 
clamber  over  the  ruins  on  foot.  Reaching  the  north- 
eastern corner  of  the  Valley  of  the  Kidron,  he  would 
turn  round  by  the  northern  side  of  the  city,  where  most 
of  the  gates  had  been  situated,  because  there  the  city, 
which  was  difficult  of  access  to  the  south  and  the  east 
on  account  of  the  encircling  ravines,  could  be  easily 
approached. 

And  what  did  he  gain  by  his  journey  ?  He  gained 
knowledge.  The  reformation  that  is  planned  by  the 
student  at  his  desk,  without  any  reference  to  the  actual 
state  of  affairs,  will  be,  at  best,  a  Utopian  dream.  But 
if  the  dreamer  is  also  a  man  of  resources  and  oppor- 
tunities, his  impracticable  schemes  may  issue  in  incal- 
culable mischief.  "  Nothing  is  more  terrible,"  sa3's 
Goethe,  "  than  active  ignorance ^  We  can  smile  at 
a  knight-errant  Don  Quixote;  but  a  Don  Quixote  in 
power  would  be  as  dangerous  as  a  Nero.  Most 
schemes  of  socialism,  though  they  spring  from  the 
brains  of  amiable  enthusiasts,  break  up  like  empty 
bubbles  on  the  first  contact  with  the  real  world.  It 
is  especially  necessary,  too,  to  know  the  worst.     Op- 


Neh.  ii.  9-20.]  THE  MIDNIGHT  RIDE.  203 


tiniism  is  very  cheering  in  idea,  but  when  it  is  indulged 
in  to  the  neglect  of  truth,  with  an  impatient  disregard 
for  the  shad}^  side  of  life,  it  simply  leads  its  devotees 
into  a  fools'  paradise.  The  highest  idealist  must  have 
something  of  the  realist  in  him  if  he  would  ever  have 
his  ideas  transformed  into  facts. 

Further,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  Nehemiah  would 
gather  his  information  for  himself;  he  could  not  be 
content  with  hearsay  evidence.  Here  again  he  reveals 
the  practical  man.  It  is  not  that  he  distrusts  the 
honesty  of  any  agents  he  might  employ,  nor  merely 
that  he  is  aware  of  the  deplorable  inaccuracy  of  ob- 
servers generally  and  the  inability  of  nearly  all  people 
to  give  an  uncoloured  account  of  what  they  have  seen  ; 
but  he  knows  that  there  is  an  impression  to  be  obtained 
by  personal  observation  which  the  most  correct  descrip- 
tion cannot  approach.  No  map  or  book  will  give  a 
man  a  right  idea  of  a  place  that  he  has  never  visited. 
If  this  is  true  of  the  external  world,  much  more  is  it 
the  case  with  those  spiritual  realities  which  the  eye 
hath  not  seen,  and  which  therefore  it  has  not  entered 
into  the  heart  of  man  to  conceive.  Wordsworth  fre- 
quently refers  to  his  sensations  of  surprise  and  disap- 
pointment passing  over  into  a  new  delight  when  he 
first  beheld  scenes  long  ago  described  to  him  in  verse 
of  legend.  He  finds  ''  Yarrow  visited "  very  unlike 
"  Yarrow  unvisited."  One  commonplace  distinction 
we  must  all  have  noticed  under  similar  circumstances 
— viz.,  that  the  imagination  is  never  rich  and  varied 
enough  to  supply  us  with  the  complications  of  the 
reality.  Before  we  have  looked  at  it  our  idea  of  the 
landscape  is  too  simple,  and  an  invariable  impression 
produced  by  the  actual  sight  of  it  is  to  make  us  feel 
how    much    more    elaborate   it  is.     Indeed   a  personal 


204  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


investigation  of  most  phenomena  reveals  an  amount 
of  complication  previously  unsuspected.  Where  the 
investigation  is,  like  Nehemiah's,  concerned  with  an 
evil  we  propose  to  attack,  the  result  is  that  we  begin 
to  see  that  the  remedy  cannot  be  so  simple  as  we 
imagined  before  we  knew  all  the  facts. 

But  the  chief  effect  of  Nehemiah's  night  ride  would 
be  to  impress  him  with  an  overwhelming  sense  of  the 
desolation  of  Jerusalem.  We  may  know  much  by 
report,  but  we  feel  most  keenly  that  of  which  we  have 
had  personal  experience.  Thus  the  news  of  a  gigantic 
cataclysm  in  China  does  not  affect  us  with  a  hundredth 
part  of  the  emotion  that  is  excited  in  us  by  a  simple 
street  accident  seen  from  our  own  windows.  The  man 
whose  heart  will  be  moved  enough  for  him  to  sacrifice 
himself  seriously  in  relieving  misery  is  he  who  will 
first  '^  visit  the  fatherless  and  widows  in  their  afflic- 
tion." *  Then  the  proof  that  the  impression  is  deep 
and  real,  and  not  a  mere  idle  sentiment,  will  be  seen 
in  the  fact  that  it  prompts  action.  Nehemiah  was 
moved  to  tears  by  the  report  of  the  ruinous  condition 
of  Jerusalem,  which  reached  him  in  the  far-off  palace 
beyond  the  Euphrates.  What  the  scene  meant  to  him 
as  he  slowly  picked  his  way  among  the  huge  masses  of 
masonry  is  seen  by  his  conduct  immediately  after- 
wards. It  must  have  stirred  him  profoundly.  The 
silence  of  the  sleeping  city,  broken  now  and  again  by 
the  dismal  howls  of  packs  of  dogs  scouring  the  streets, 
or  perhaps  by  the  half-human  shrieks  of  jackals  on  the 
deserted  hills  in  the  outlying  country  ;  the  dreary 
solitude  of  the  interminable  heaps  of  ruins ;  the 
mystery  of  strange  objects  half-descried  in  the  distance 

*  James  i.  27. 


Neh.  ii.  9-20.]  T?IE   MIDNIGHT  RIDE.  205 


by  starlight,  or,  at  best,  by  moonlight  ;  the  mournful 
discovery,  on  nearer  view,  of  huge  building  stones 
tumbled  over  and  strewn  about  on  mountainous  heaps 
of  dust  and  rubbish ;  the  gloom,  the  desolation,  the 
terror, — all  this  was  enough  to  make  the  heart  of  a 
patriot  faint  with  despair.  Was  it  possible  to  remedy 
such  huge  calamities  ? 

Nehemiah  does  not  despair.  He  has  no  time  to 
grieve.  We  hear  no  more  of  his  weeping  and  lamen- 
tation and  fasting.  Now  he  is  spurred  on  to  decisive 
action. 

Fortified  by  the  knowledge  he  has  acquired  in  his 
adventurous  night  ride,  and  urged  by  the  melancholy 
sights  he  has  witnessed,  Nehemiah  loses  no  time  in 
bringing  his  plans  before  the  oligarchy  of  nobles  who 
held  the  rule  in  Jerusalem  previous  to  his  coming,  as 
well  as  the  rest  of  the  Jews.  Though  he  is  now  the 
officially  appointed  governor,  he  cannot  arrange  matters 
with  a  high  hand.  He  must  enlist  the  sympathy  and 
encourage  the  faith,  both  of  the  leaders  and  of  the 
people  generally. 

The  following  points  in  his  speech  to  the  Jews  may 
be  noticed.  First,  he  calls  attention  to  the  desolate 
condition  of  Jerusalem.*  This  is  a  fact  well  known. 
"  Ye  see  the  evil  case  that  we  are  in,"  he  says,  "  how 
Jerusalem  lieth  waste,  and  the  gates  thereof  are  burned 
with  fire."  The  danger  was  that  apathy  would  succeed 
to  despair,  for  it  is  possible  for  people  to  become 
accustomed  to  the  most  miserable  condition.  The 
reformer  must  infuse  a  "  Divine  discontent "  ;  and  the 
preliminary  step  is  to  get  the  evil  plight  well  recognised 
and  heartily  disliked.     In  the  second  place,  Nehemiah 

*  Neh.  ii.  17,  18. 


2o6  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

exhorts  the  nobles  and  people  to  join  him  in  building 
the  walls.  So  now  he  clearly  reveals  his  plan.  The 
charm  in  his  utterance  here  is  in  the  use  of  the  first 
person  plural :  not  the  first  person  singular — he  ^can- 
not do  the  work  alone,  nor  does  he  wish  to ;  not  the 
second  person — though  he  is  the  authoritative  governor, 
he  does  not  enjoin  on  others  a  task  the  toil  and  respon- 
sibility of  which  he  will  not  share  himself.  In  the 
genuine  use  of  this  pronoun  "  we  "  there  lies  the  secret 
of  all  effective  exhortation.  Next  Nehemiah  proceeds 
to  adduce  reasons  for  his  appeal.  He  calls  out  the  sense 
of  patriotic  pride  in  the  remark,  "  that  we  be  no  more  a 
reproach  " ;  and  he  goes  further,  for  the  Jews  are  the 
people  of  God,  and  for  them  to  fail  is  for  reproach  to 
be  cast  on  the  name  of  God  Himself.  Here  is  the 
great  religious  motive  for  not  permitting  the  city  of 
God  to  lie  in  ruins,  as  it  is  to-day  the  supreme  motive 
for  keeping  all  taint  of  dishonour  from  the  Church  of 
Christ. 

But  direct  encouragements  are  needed.  A  sense  of 
shame  may  rouse  us  from  our  lethargy,  and  yet  in  the 
end  it  will  be  depressing  if  it  does  not  give  place  to  the 
inspiration  of  a  new  hope.  Now  Nehemiah  has  two 
fresh  grounds  of  encouragement.  He  first  names  that 
which  he  esteems  highest — the  presence  and  help  of 
God  in  his  work.  '' I  told  them,"  he  says,  ^'of  the 
hand  of  my  God  which  was  good  upon  me."  How  could 
he  despair,  even  at  the  spectacle  of  the  ruined  walls 
and  gateways,  with  the  consciousness  of  this  great  and 
wonderful  truth  glowing  in  his  heart  ?  Not  that  he 
v/as  a  mystic  weaving  fantastic  dreams  out  of  the- 
filmy  substance  of  his  own  vague  feelings.  It  is  true 
he  felt  impelled  b}''  the  strong  urging  of  his  patriotism, 
and  he  knev/  that  God  was  in  that  holy  passion.      Yet 


Neh.  ii.  9-20.]  THE  MIDNIGHT  RIDE.  207 

Ills  was  an  objective  mind  and  he  recognised  the  hand 
of  God  chiefly  in  external  events — in  the  Providence 
that  opens  doors  and  indicates  paths,  that  levels 
mountains  of  difficulty  and  fills  up  impassable  chasms, 
that  even  bends  the  wills  of  great  kings  to  do  its 
bidding.  This  action  of  Providence  he  had  himself  wit- 
nessed ;  his  very  presence  at  Jerusalem  was  a  token  of 
it.  He,  once  a  household  slave  in  the  jealous  seclusion  of 
an  Oriental  palace,  was  now  the  governor  of  Jerusalem, 
appointed  to  his  post  for  the  express  purpose  of  restoring 
the  miserable  city  to  strength  and  safety.  In  all  this 
Nehemiah  felt  the  hand  of  God  upon  him.  Then  it 
was  a  gracious  and  merciful  Providence  that  had  led 
him.  Therefore  he  could  not  but  own  further  that  the 
hand  of  God  was  "  good."  He  perceived  God's  work, 
and  that  work  was  to  him  most  wonderfully  full  of 
lovingkindness.  Here  indeed  was  the  greatest  of  all 
encouragements  to  proceed.  It  was  well  that  Nehemiah 
had  the  devout  insight  to  perceive  it ;  a  less  spiritually 
minded  man  might  have  received  the  marvellous  favour 
without  ever  discovering  the  hand  from  which  it  came. 
Following  the  example  of  the  miserable,  worldly  Jacob, 
some  of  us  wake  up  in  our  Bethel  to  exclaim  with 
surprise,  "  Surely  the  Lord  is  in  this  place  ;  and  I  knew 
it  not."  *  But  even  that  is  better  than  to  slumber  on 
in  dull  indifference,  too  dead  to  recognise  the  Presence 
that  guides  and  blesses  every  footstep,  provoking  the 
melancholy  lamentation  :  "  The  ox  knoweth  his  owner, 
and  the  ass  his  master's  crib  :  but  Israel  doth  not  know, 
My  people  doth  not  consider."  f 

Lastly,    Nehemiah    not  only  perceived   the  hand   of 
God  and  took  courage  from  his  assurance  of  the  fact ; 

*  Gen.  xxviii.  16.  -j-  Isa.  i.  3. 


2o8       EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

he  made  this  glorious  fact  known  to  the  nobles  of 
Jerusalem  in  order  to  rouse  their  enthusiasm.  He  had 
the  simplicity  of  earnestness,  the  openness  of  one  who 
forgets  self  in  advocating  a  great  cause.  Is  not 
reticence  in  religion  too  often  a  consequence  of  the 
habit  of  turning  one's  thoughts  inward  ?  Such  a  habit 
will  vanish  at  the  touch  of  a  serious  purpose.  The  man 
w^ho  is  in  dead  earnest  has  no  time  to  be  self-conscious  ; 
he  does  not  indulge  in  sickly  reflections  on  the  effect 
of  what  he  says  on  other  people's  opinions  about  him- 
self; he  will  not  care  what  they  think  about  him  so  long 
as  he  moves  them  to  do  the  thing  it  is  laid  on  his  soul 
to  urge  upon  them.  But  it  is  difficult  to  escape  from 
the  selfish  subjectivity  of  modern  religion,  and  recover 
the  grand  naturalness  of  the  saints  alike  of  Old  and  of 
New  Testament  times. 

After  this  revelation  of  the  Divine  Presence,  Nehe- 
miah's  second  ground  of  encouragement  is  of  minor 
interest ;  it  can  be  but  one  link  in  the  chain  of  provi- 
dential leading.  Yet  for  a  man  who  had  not  reached 
his  lofty  point  of  view^,  it  would  have  filled  the  whole 
horizon.  The  king  had  given  permission  to  the  Jews 
to  rebuild  the  walls  ;  and  he  had  allowed  Nehemiah  to 
visit  Jerusalem  for  the  very  purpose  of  carrying  out 
the  work.  This  king,  Artaxerxes,  whose  firman  had 
stop'ped  the  earher  attempt  and  even  sanctioned  the 
devastating  raid  of  the  enemies  of  the  Jews,  was  now 
proving  himself  the  friend  and  champion  of  Jerusalem  ! 
Here  was  cheering  news  ! 

It  is  not  surprising  that  such  a  powerful  appeal  as 
this  of  Nehemiah's  was  successful.  It  was  like  the 
magic  horn  that  awoke  the  inmates  of  the  enchanted 
castle.  The  spell  was  broken.  The  long,  listless 
torpor  of  the  Jews  gave  place  to  hope  and  energy,  and 


Neh.  ii.  9-20.]  THE  MIDNIGHT  RIDE.  209 


the  people  braced  themselves  to  commence  the  work. 
These  Jews  who  had  been  so  lethargic  hitherto  were 
now  the  very  men  to  undertake  it.  Nehemiah  brought 
no  new  labourers ;  but  he  brought  what  was  better, 
the  one  essential  requisite  for  every  great  enterprise — 
an  inspiration.  He  brought  what  the  world  most 
needs  in  every  age.  We  wait  for  better  men  to  arise 
and  undertake  the  tasks  that  seem  to  be  too  great  for 
our  strength  ;  we  cry  for  a  new  race  of  God-sent 
heroes  to  accomplish  the  Herculean  labours  before 
which  we  faint  and  fail.  But  we  might  ourselves 
become  the  better  men ;  nay,  assuredly  we  should 
become  God's  heroes,  if  we  would  but  open  our  hearts 
to  receive  the  Spirit  by  the  breath  of  which  the 
weakest  are  made  strong  and  the  most  indolent  are 
fired  with  a  Divine  energy.  To-day,  as  in  the  time 
of  Nehemiah,  the  one  supreme  need  is  inspiration. 


14 


CHAPTER   XIX. 

BUILDING   THE   WALLS. 
Nehemiah  iii. 

THE  third  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah  supplies 
a  striking  illustration  of  the  constructive  char- 
acter of  the  history  of  the  Jews  in  the  Persian  period. 
Nor  is  that  all.  A  mechanical,  Chinese  industry  may 
be  found  side  by  side  with  indications  of  moral  littleness. 
But  the  activity  displayed  in  the  restoration  of  the  city 
walls  is  more  than  industrious,  more  than  productive. 
We  must  be  struck  with  the  breadth  of  the  picture. 
This  characteristic  was  manifest  in  the  earlier  work 
of  building  the  temple,  and  it  pervades  the  subsequent 
religious  movement  of  the  shaping  of  Judaism  and  the 
development  of  The  Law.  Here  it  is  apparent  in  the 
fact  that  the  Jews  unite  in  a  great  common  work  for 
the  good  of  the  whole  community.  It  was  right  and 
necessary  that  they  should  rebuild  their  private  houses  ; 
but  though  it  would  appear  that  some  of  these  houses 
must  have  been  in  a  very  ruinous  condition,  for  this 
was  the  case  even  with  the  governor's  residence,*  the 
great  scheme  now  set  on  foot  was  for  the  pubhc 
advantage.  There  is  something  almost  socialistic  about 
the   execution  of  it ;  at  all  events  w^e  meet  with  that 

*  Neh.  ii.  8. 

210 


Neh.  iii.]  BUILDING   THE   WALLS.  211 

comprehensiveness  of  view,  that  elevation  of  tone,  that 
sinking  of  self  in  the  interests  of  society,  which  we 
should  look  for  in  true  citizenship. 

This  is  the  more  noteworthy  because  the  object  of  the 
Jews  in  the  present  undertaking  was  what  is  now  called 
"  secular."  The  earlier  public  building  operations 
carried  out  by  their  fathers  had  been  confessedly  and 
formally  religious.  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  had  led  a 
band  of  pilgrims  up  to  Jerusalem  for  the  express 
purpose  of  rebuilding  the  temple,  and  at  first  the 
returned  exiles  had  confined  their  attention  to  this 
work  and  its  associated  sacrificial  rites,  without  reveal- 
ing any  political  ambition,  and  apparently  without  even 
coveting  any  civic  privileges.  Subsequently  some 
sense  of  citizenship  had  begun  to  appear  in  Ezra's 
reformation,  but  every  expression  of  it  had  been  since 
checked  by  jealous  and  hostile  influences  from  without. 
At  length  Nehemiah  succeeded  in  rousing  the  spirit 
of  citizenship  by  means  of  the  inspiration  of  religious 
faith.  The  new  enthusiasm  was  not  directly  concerned 
with  the  temple ;  it  aimed  at  fortifying  the  city.  Yet  it 
sprang  from  prayer  and  faith.  Thus  the  Jews  were 
feeling  their  way  to  that  sacredness  of  civic  duties 
which  we  in  the  freer  air  of  Christianity  have  been  so 
slow  to  acknowledge. 

The  special  form  of  this  activity  in  the  public  interest 
is  also  significant.  The  process  of  drawing  a  line  round 
Jerusalem  by  enclosing  it  within  the  definite  circuit  of 
a  wall  helped  to  mark  the  individuality  and  unity  of 
the  place  as  a  city^  which  an  amorphous  congerie  of 
houses  could  not  be,  according  to  the  ancient  estimate, 
because  the  chief  distinction  between  a  city  and  a 
village  was  just  this,  that  the  city  was  walled  while  the 
village  was  unwalled.      The  first  privilege  enjoyed  by 


212  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


the  city  would  be  its  security — its  strength  to  withstand 
assaults.  But  the  walls  that  shut  out  foes  shut  in  the 
citizens — a  fact  which  seems  to  have  been  present  to 
the  mind  of  the  poet -who  wrote, — 

"Our  feet  are  standing 
Within  thy  gates,  O  Jerusalem  ; 
Jerusalem,  that  art  builded 
As  a  city  that  is  compact  together."  * 

The  city  is  ''  compact  together."     City  Kfe  is  corporate 
life.     It  is  not  at  all  easy  for  us  to  appreciate  this  fact 
while  our  idea  of  a  cit}^  is  only  represented  by  a  crowd 
of  men,  women,  and  children  crammed  into  a  limited 
space,  but  v/ith  scarcely  any  sense  of  common  Hfe  and 
aims ;    still    less   when   we    look   behind    the   garish 
splendour  of  the  streets  to  the  misery  and  degradation, 
the  disease  and  famine  and  vice,  that  make  their  nests 
under    the    very    shadow    of    wealth    and    pleasure. 
Naturally  we  turn  with  loathing  from  such  sights,  and 
long  for  the  fresh,  quiet  country  life.     But  this  acci- 
dental conglomerate  of  bricks  and  human  beings  is  in 
no  sense  a  city.     The  true  city — such  a  city  as  Jeru- 
salem, or  Athens,  or  Rome  in  its  best  days — is  a  focus 
of  the  very  highest  development  of  life  known  to  man. 
The  word  **  civilisation  "  should  remind  us  that  it  is  the 
city  which  indicates  the  difference  between  the  cultivated 
man  and  the  savage.      Originally  it  was  the  civis,  the 
citizen,  who  marched  in  the  van  of  the  world's  progress. 
Nor  is  it  difficult  to  account  for  his  position.     Inter- 
communication   of  ideas  sharpening  intelligence — '^  as 
iron  sharpeneth  iron," — division  of  labour  permitting  the 
speciaHsation  of  industry,  combination  in  work  making 
it  possible  for  great  undertakings  to  be  carried  out,  the 

*  Psalm  cxxii.  2,  3. 


Neh.  iii.]  BUILDING   THE   WALLS.  213 

necessity  for  mutual  considerateness  among  the  members 
of  a  community  and  the  consequent  development  of  the 
social  sympathies,  all  tend  to  progress.  And  the  sense 
of  a  common  life  realised  in  this  way  has  weighty 
moral  issues.  The  larger  the  social  unit  becomes,  the 
more  will  people  be  freed  from  pettiness  of  thought 
and  selfishness  of  aim.  The  first  step  in  this  direction 
is  made  when  we  regard  the  family  rather  than  the 
individual  as  the  true  unit.  If  we  pass  beyond  this  in 
modern  times,  we  commonly  advance  straight  on  to  the 
whole  nation  for  our  notion  of  a  compact  community. 
But  the  stride  is  too  great.  Very  few  people  are  able 
to  reach  the  patriotism  that  sinks  self  in  the  larger  life 
of  a  nation.  With  a  Mazzini,  and  even  with  smaller 
men  who  are  magnetised  by  the  passion  of  such  an 
enthusiast  in  times  of  excitement,  this  may  be  possible. 
But  with  ordinary  men  in  ordinary  times  it  is  not  very 
attainable.  How  many  Englishmen  leave  legacies  for 
the  payment  of  the  National  Debt  ?  Still  more  difficult 
is  it  to  become  really  cosmopolitan,  and  acquire  a  sense 
of  the  supreme  duty  of  living  for  mankind.  Our  Lord 
has  come  to  our  aid  here  in  giving  us  a  new  unit — the 
Church  ;  so  that  to  be  a  citizen  of  this  "  City  of  God  " 
is  to  be  called  out  of  the  circle  of  the  narrow,  selfish 
interests  into  the  large  place  where  great,  common  duties 
and  an  all-comprehensive  good  of  the  whole  body  are 
set  before  us  as  the  chief  aims  to  be  pursued. 

In  rebuilding  the  city  walls,  then,  Nehemiah  was 
accomplishing  two  good  objects  ;  he  was  fortifying  the 
place,  and  he  was  restoring  its  organic  unity.  The 
two  advantages  would  be  mutually  helpful,  because 
the  weakness  of  Jerusalem  was  destroying  the  pecu- 
liar character  of  her  life.  The  aristocracy,  thinking  it 
impossible  to  preserve  the  community  in  isolation,  had 


214  .  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


encouraged  and  practised  intermarriage  with  neigh- 
bouring people,  no  doubt  from  a  pohtic  regard  to  the 
advantage  of  foreign  alliances.  Although  Nehemiah 
was  not  yet  prepared  to  grapple  with  this  great 
question,  his  fortification  of  Jerusalem  would  help  the 
citizens  to  maintain  their  Jewish  separateness,  ac- 
cording to  the  principle  that  only  the  strong  can  be 
free. 

The  careful  report  which  Nehemiah  has  preserved  of 
the  organisation  of  this  work  shows  us  how  complete 
it  was.  The  whole  circuit  of  the  walls  was  restored. 
Of  course  it  was  most  necessary  that  nothing  less 
should  be  attempted,  because,  like  the  strength  of  a 
chain,  the  strength  of  a  fortress  is  Hmited  to  that 
of  its  weakest  part.  And  yet — obvious  as  it  is — 
probably  most  failures,  not  only  in  pubHc  works,  but 
also  in  private  lives,  are  directly  attributable  to  the 
neglect  of  this  elementary  principle  of  defence.  The 
difficulty  always  is  to  reach  that  kind  of  perfection 
which  is  suggested  by  the  circle,  rather  than  the 
pinnacle — the  perfection  of  completeness.  Now  in 
the  present  instance  the  completion  of  the  circuit  of 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  testifies  to  the  admirable  organ- 
ising power  of  Nehemiah,  his  tact  in  putting  the  right 
men  in  the  right  places — the  most  important  and 
difficult  duty  of  a  leader  of  men,  and  his  perseverance 
in  overcoming  the  obstacles  and  objections  that  must 
have  been  thrust  in  his  path — all  of  them  Vv^hat  people 
call  secular  qualities,  yet  all  sustained  and  perfected 
by  a  noble  zeal  and  by  that  transparent  unselfishness 
which  is  the  most  powerful  solvent  of  the  selfishness 
of  other  people.  There  are  more  moral  qualities  in- 
volved in  the  art  of  organisation  than  they  would 
suppose   who   regard   it   as   a   hard,    mechanical   con- 


Neb.  iii.]  BUILDING   THE   WALLS.  215 


trivance  in  which  human  beings  are  treated  like  parts 
of  a  machine.  The  highest  form  of  organisation  is 
never  attained  in  that  brutal  manner.  Directly  we 
approach  men  as  persons  endowed  with  rights,  con- 
victions, and  feelings,  an  element  of  sympathy  is  called 
for  which  makes  the  organising  process  a  much  more 
delicate  concern. 

Another  point  calls  for  remark  here.  Nehemiah's 
description  of  his  organisation  of  the  people  for  the 
purpose  of  building  the  walls  Hnks  the  several  groups 
of  men  who  were  responsible  for  the  different  parts 
with  their  several  districts.  The  method  of  division 
shows  a  devolution  of  responsibility.  Each  gang  had 
its  own  bit  of  wall  or  its  own  gate  to  see  to.  The 
rule  regulating  the  assignment  of  districts  was  that, 
as  far  as  practicable,  every  man  should  undertake  the 
work  opposite  his  own  house.  He  was  literally  to  ''  do 
the  thing  that  lay  nearest  "  to  him  in  this  business. 
It  was  in  every  way  a  wise  arrangement.  It  would 
prevent  the  disorder  and  vexation  that  would  be  excited 
if  people  were  running  about  to  select  favourite  sites — 
choosing  the  easiest  place,  or  the  most  prominent,  or 
the  safest,  or  any  other  desirable  spot.  Surely  there  is 
no  principle  of  organisation  so  simple  or  so  wise  as 
that  which  directs  us  to  work  near  home  in  the  first 
instance.  With  the  Jews  this  rule  would  commend 
itself  to  the  instinct  of  self-interest.  Nobody  would 
wish  the  enemy  to  make  a  breach  opposite  his  own 
door,  of  all  places.  Therefore  the  most  selfish  man 
would  be  likely  to  see  to  it  that  the  wall  near  his 
house  was  solidly  built.  If,  however,  no  other  induce- 
ments had  been  felt  in  the  end,  the  work  would  have 
failed  of  any  great  public  good,  as  all  purely  selfish 
work    must  ultimately  fail.      There  would   have   been 


21 6  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


gaps  which  it  was   nobody's   interest  in  particular  to 
fill. 

Next  it  is  to  be  observed  that  this  building  was  done 
by  "piece  work/'  and  that  with  the  names  of  the 
workmen  attached  to  it,  so  that  if  any  of  them  did  their 
work  ill  the  fact  would  be  known  and  recorded  to  their 
lasting  disgrace  ;  but  also  so  that  if  any  put  an  extra 
amount  of  finish  on  their  work  this  too  should  be 
known  and  remembered  to  their  credit.  The  idle  and 
neghgent  workman  would  wilHngly  be  lost  in  the  crowd  ; 
but  this  escape  was  not  to  be  permitted,  he  must  be 
dragged  out  and  set  in  the  pillory  of  notoriety.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  humble  and  devoted  citizen  would  crave 
no  recognition,  doing  his  task  lovingly  for  the  sake  of 
his  God  and  his  city,  feeling  that  the  work  was  every- 
thing— the  worker  nothing.  For  his  own  sake  one 
who  labours  in  this  beautiful  spirit  seems  to  deserve 
to  be  sheltered  from  the  blaze  of  admiration  at  the 
thought  of  which  he  shrinks  back  in  dismay.  And  3^et 
this  is  not  always  possible.  St.  Paul  writes  of  the  day 
when  every  man's  work  shall  be  made  manifest.*  If 
the  honour  is  really  offered  to  God,  who  inspires  the 
work,  the  modesty  which  leads  the  human  agent  to 
seek  the  shade  may  be  overstrained,  for  the  servant 
need  not  blush  to  stand  in  the  light  when  all  eyes  are 
directed  to  his  Master.  But  when  honour  is  offered  to 
the  servant  also,  this  may  not  be  without  its  advantages. 
Rightly  taken  it  will  humble  him.  He  will  feel  that  his 
unworthiness  would  not  have  permitted  this  if  God  had 
not  been  very  gracious  to  him.  Then  he  will  feel  also 
that  he  has  a  character  to  maintain.  If  it  is  ruinous  to 
lose  a  reputation — *'  the    better   part  of  me,"  as  poor 

*   I   Cor.  iii.  13. 


Neh.  Hi.]  BUILDING   THE   WALLS.  217 

Cassio  exclaims  in  his  agony  of  remorse — it  must  be 
helpful  to  have  one  to  guard  from  reproach.  "  A  good 
name  is  rather  to  be  chosen  than  great  riches/'  *  not 
only  because  of  the  indirect  advantages  it  brings  from  the 
consideration  of  the  world — its  mere  purchasing  power 
in  the  market  of  human  favour  ;  this  is  its  least  advan- 
tage. Its  chief  value  is  in  the  very  possession  of  it 
by  one  whose  honour  is  involved  in  living  worthily 
of  it. 

From  another  point  of  view  the  record  of  the  names 
of  people  who  have  rendered  good  service  may  be 
valuable.  It  will  be  a  stimulus  to  their  successors. 
The  Early  Church  preserved  the  names  of  her  confessors 
and  martyrs  in  the  diptychs  which  were  expressly 
provided  for  use  in  public  worship,  that  God  might  be 
praised  for  their  noble  lives,  and  that  the  living  might 
be  stimulated  to  follow  their  example.  Here  is  one  of 
the  great  uses  of  history.  We  cannot  afford  to  forget 
the  loyal  service  of  the  past,  because  out  of  it  we  draw 
inspiration  for  the  present.  The  people  with  a  great 
history  have  come  into  a  rich  heritage.  To  be  a  child 
of  a  really  noble  house,  to  spring  from  a  family  truly 
without  reproach — a  family  all  whose  sons  are  pure  and 
all  whose  daughters  are  brave — surely  this  is  to  receive 
a  high  commission  to  cherish  the  good  name  unsullied. 
As  the  later  Jews  gazed  at  the  towers  of  Jerusalem 
and  marked  well  her  bulwarks,  with  the  thought  that 
this  massive  strength  was  the  fruit  of  the  toil  and 
sacrifice  of  their  own  forefathers — so  that  the  very 
names  of  individual  ancestors  were  linked  with  exact 
spots  on  the  grey  walls — they  would  hear  a  call  to 
loyal  service  worthy  of  their  noble  predecessors. 

*  Prov.  xxii.  I. 


2i8  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


To  proceed,  we  may  observe  further  that  the  groups 
of  builders  fall  into  several  classes.  The  first  place  is 
given  to  the  priestly  order — '*  the  high-priest  and  his 
brethren  the  priests."  *  This  is  quite  in  accordance 
with  the  sacerdotal  spirit  of  the  times,  when  the 
theocracy  was  emerging  into  power  to  take  the  place 
left  vacant  by  the  decay  of  the  house  of  David.  But 
the  priests  are  not  only  named  first.  Nehemiah  states 
that  they  were  the  first  to  respond  to  his  appeal. 
"  Then^^ — i.e.,  after  he  had  addressed  the  assembled 
Jews — "Then  Eliashib  the  high-priest  rose  up,'"  etc. 
This  man — the  grandson  of  Jeshua,  from  whom  so 
much  was  expected  by  Zechariah — was  the  first  to  set 
his  hand  to  the  tremendous  task.  First  in  honour,  he 
was  first  in  service.  The  beauty  of  his  action  lies  in 
its  silence.  Not  a  word  is  recorded  as  spoken  by  him. 
But  he  was  not  satisfied  to  sanction  the  work  of  humbler 
men.  He  led  the  people  in  the  best  possible  way,  by 
beginning  the  work  himself,  by  directly  taking  upon 
him  his  share  of  it.  In  this  noble  simplicity  of  service 
Eliashib  was  followed  by  the  priesthood  generally. 
These  men  put  forth  no  claims  to  immunity  from  the 
obligation  of  civic  duties  or  secular  occupations.  It 
never  occurred  to  them  to  object  that  such  employ- 
ments were  in  the  least  degree  inconsistent  with  their 
high  office.  The  priestly  order  was  hampered  by 
the  strictest  rules  of  artificial  separation ;  but  the 
quaint  notion — so  common  in  the  East,  and  not  quite 
unknown  in  the  West — that  there  is  something  de- 
grading in  hard  work  did  not  enter  into  them. 

There  are  two  points  to  be  noticed  in  the  special 
work  of  the  priests.     First,  its  locality.    These  ministers 

*  Neh.  iii.  i. 


Neh.  iii.]  .      BUILDING    THE    WALLS.  219 


of  the  temple  set  up  the  "  Sheep  Gate,"  which  was  the 
gate  nearest  to  the  temple.  Thus  they  made  them- 
selves responsible  for  their  own  quarters,  guarding 
what  was  especially  entrusted  to  their  care.  This  was 
in  accordance  with  the  plan  observed  all  round  the  city, 
that  the  inhabitants  should  work  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  their  respective  houses.  The  priests,  who  have  the 
honour  of  special  connection  with  the  temple,  feel  that 
a  special  charge  accompanies  that  honour  ;  and  rightly, 
for  responsibility  always  follows  privilege.  Second,  its 
consecration.  The  priests  ''  sanctified  "  their  work — i.e., 
they  dedicated  it  to  God.  This  was  not  in  the  sacred 
enclosure — the  Haraniy  as  it  is  now  called.  Neverthe- 
less, their  gate  and  wall,  as  well  as  their  temple,  were 
to  be  reckoned  holy.  They  did  not  hold  the  strange 
modern  notion  that  while  the  cemetery,  the  city  of  the 
dead,  is  to  be  consecrated,  the  city  of  the  living  requires 
no  consecration.  They  saw  that  the  very  stones  and 
timbers  of  Jerusalem  belonged  to  God,  and  needed  His 
presence  to  keep  them  safe  and  pure.  They  were 
wise,  for  is  He  not  "  the  God  of  the  living "  and  of 
all  the  concerns  of  life  ? 

The  next  class  of  workmen  is  comprised  of  men  who 
were  taken  according  to  their  families.  These  would 
probably  be  all  of  them  citizens  of  Jerusalem,  some 
present  by  right  of  birth  as  descendants  of  former 
citizens,  others  perhaps  sprung  from  the  inhabitants 
of  distant  towns  not  yet  restored  to  Israel  who  had 
made  Jerusalem  their  home.  Their  duty  to  fortify 
their  own  city  was  indubitable. 

But  now,,  as  in  the  earlier  lists,  there  is  another  class 
among  the  laity,  consisting  of  the  inhabitants  of  neigh- 
bouring towns,  who  are  arranged,  not  according  to 
families,  but  according  to  their  residence.     Most  likely 


220  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

these  men  were  living  in  Jerusalem  at  the  time ;  and 
yet  it  is  probable  that  they  retained  their  interest  in 
their  provincial  localities.  But  Jerusalem  was  the 
capital,  the  centre  of  the  nation,  the  Holy  City.  There- 
fore the  inhabitants  of  other  cities  must  care  for  her 
welfare.  In  a  great  scheme  of  religious  centralisation 
at  Jerusalem  Josiah  had  found  the  best  means  of 
establishing  unity  of  worship,  and  so  of  impressing 
upon  the  worshippers  the  idea  of  the  unity  of  God. 
The  same  method  was  still  pursued.  People  were 
not  yet  ripe  for  the  larger  thoughts  of  God  and  His 
worship  which  Jesus  expressed  by  Jacob's  well.  Until 
that  was  reached,  external  unity  with  a  visible  centre 
was  essential  if  a  multiplex  division  of  divinity  was  to 
be  avoided.  After  these  neighbours  who  thus  helped 
the  metropolis  we  have  two  other  groups — the  temple 
servants  and  the  trade  guilds  of  goldsmiths  and 
merchants. 

Now,  while  on  all  sides  ready  volunteers  press  for- 
ward to  the  work,  just  one  painful  exception  is  found 
to  mar  the  harmony  of  the  scene,  or  rather  to  lessen 
its  volume — for  this  was  found  in  abstention,  not  in 
active  opposition.  To  their  shame  it  is  recorded  that 
the  nobles  of  Tekoa  "put  not  their  necks  to  the  work  of 
their  Lord."  *  The  general  body  of  citizens  from  this 
town  took  part.  We  are  not  told  why  the  aristocracy 
held  back.  Did  they  consider  the  labour  beneath  their 
dignity  ?  or  was  there  a  breach  between  them  and 
the  townsfolk  ?  The  people  of  Tekoa  may  have  been 
especially  democratic.  Ages  before,  a  herdsman  from 
this  same  town,  the  rough  prophet  Amos,  had  shown 
Httle  respect  for  the  great  ones  of  the  earth.     Possibly 

*  Neh.  iii.  5. 


Neh.  iii.J  BUILDING    THE   WALLS. 


the  Tekoites  had  vexed  their  princes  by  showing  a 
similar  spirit  of  independence.  But  if  so,  Nehemiah 
would  regard  their  conduct  as  affording  the  princes  no 
excuse.  For  it  was  the  Lord's  work  that  these  nobles 
refused  to  undertake,  and  there  is  no  justification  for 
letting  God's  service  suffer  when  a  quarrel  has  broken 
out  between  His  servants.  Yet  how  common  is  this 
miserable  result  of  divisions  among  men  who  should  be 
united  in  the  service  of  God.  Whatever  was  the  cause 
— whether  it  was  some  petty  personal  offence  or  some 
grave  difference  of  opinion — these  nobles  go  down  the 
ages,  like  those  unhappy  men  in  the  early  days  of  the 
Judges  who  earned  the  *'  curse  of  Meroz,"  disgraced 
eternally,  for  no  positive  offence,  but  simply  because  they 
left  undone  what  they  ought  to  have  done.  Nehemiah 
pronounces  no  curse.  He  chronicles  the  bare  fact. 
But  his  ominous  silence  in  regard  to  any  explanation  is 
severely  condemnatory.  The  man  who  builds  his  house 
on  the  sand  in  hearing  Christ's  words  and  doing  them 
not,  the  servant  who  is  beaten  with  many  stripes  be- 
cause he  knows  his  lord's  will  and  does  not  perform  it, 
that  other  servant  who  buries  his  talent,  the  virgins 
who  forget  to  fill  their  vessels  with  oil,  the  people 
represented  by  goats  on  the  left  hand  whose  sole 
ground  of  accusation  is  that  they  refused  to  exercise 
the  common  charities — all  these  illustrate  the  im- 
portant but  neglected  truth  that  our  Lord's  most 
frequent  words  of  condemnation  were  expressed  for 
what  we  call  negative  evil — the  evil  of  harmless  but 
useless  lives. 

Happily  we  may  set  exceptional  devotion  in  another 
quarter  over  against  the  exceptional  remissness  of 
the  nobles  of  Tekoa.  Brief  as  is  his  summary  of  the 
division   of  the  work,  Nehemiah   is  careful  to  slip  in 


222  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

a  word  of  praise  for  one  Baruch  the  son  of  Zabbai, 
saying  that  this  man  ^^ earnestly  repaired"  his  portion.* 
That  one  word  "  earnestly "  is  a  truer  stamp  of  worth 
than  all  the  honours  claimed  by  the  abstaining  nobles 
on  grounds  of  rank  or  pedigree ;  it  goes  down  the 
centuries  as  the  patent  of  true  nobility  in  the  realm 
of  industry. 

*  Neh.  iii.  20. 


CHAPTER   XX. 

"MARK   YE   WELL  HER  BULWARKS:' 
Nehemiah  iii. 

THE  Book  of  Nehemiah  is  our  principal  authority 
for  the  ancient  topography  of  Jerusalem.  But, 
as  we  have  been  already  reminded,  the  sieges  from 
which  the  city  has  suffered,  and  the  repeated  destruction 
of  its  walls  and  buildings,  have  obliterated  many  of 
the  old  landmarks  beyond  recovery.  In  some  places  the 
ground  is  now  found  to  be  raised  sixty  feet  above  the 
original  surface  ;  and  in  one  spot  it  was  even  necessary 
to  dig  down  a  hundred  and  twenty  feet  to  reach  the 
level  of  the  old  pavement.  It  is  therefore  not  at  all 
wonderful  that  the  attempt  to  identify  the  sites  here 
named  should  have  occasioned  not  a  little  perplexity. 
Still  the  explorations  of  underground  Jerusalem  have 
brought  some  important  facts  to  light,  and  others  can 
be  fairly  divined  from  a  consideration  of  the  historical 
record  in  the  light  of  the  more  general  features  of  the 
country,  which  no  wars  or  works  of  man  can  alter. 

The  first,  because  the  most  obvious,  thing  to  be 
noted  in  considering  the  site  of  Jerusalem  is  its  moun- 
tainous character.  Jerusalem  is  a  mountain  city,  as 
high  as  a  Dartmoor  tor,  some  two  thousand  feet  above 
the  Mediterranean,  with  a  drop  of  nearly  four  thousand 

feet  on  the  farther  side,  beyond  the  Mount  of  Olives, 

333 


224  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

towards  the  deep  pit  where  the  Dead  Sea  steams  in 
tropical  heat.  Looked  at  from  the  wilderness,  through 
a  gap  in  the  hills  round  Bethlehem,  she  soars  above 
us,  with  her  white  domes  and  towers  clean-cut  against 
the  burning  sky,  like  a  city  of  clouds.  In  spite  of  the 
blazing  southern  sunshine,  the  air  bites  keenly  on  that 
fine  altitude.  It  would  be  only  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  vigour  of  the  highlanders  who  dwelt  in  Jeru- 
salem was  braced  by  the  very  atmosphere  of  their 
home.  And  yet  we  have  had  to  trace  every  impulse 
of  zeal  and  energy  after  the  restoration  to  the  relaxing 
plains  of  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris  !  In  all  history 
the  moral  element  counts  for  more  than  the  material. 
Race  is  more  than  habitat ;  and  religion  is  more  than 
race. 

Closely  associated  with  this  mountainous  character 
of  Jerusalem  is  a  second  feature.  It  is  clear  that  the 
site  for  the  city  was  chosen  because  of  its  singularly 
valuable  ready-made  defences.  Jerusalem  is  a  natural 
fortress.  Protected  on  three  sides  by  deep  ravines,  it 
would  seem  that  she  could  be  easily  made  impregnable. 
How  awful,  then,  is  the  irony  of  her  destiny !  This 
city,  so  rarely  favoured  by  nature  for  security  against 
attack,  has  been  more  often  assaulted  and  captured, 
and  has  suffered  more  of  the  horrors  of  war,  than  any 
other  spot  on  earth. 

The  next  fact  to  be  noticed  is  the  small  size  of 
Jerusalem.  The  dimensions  of  the  city  have  varied  in 
different  ages.  Under  the  Herods  the  buildings  ex- 
tended far  beyond  the  ancient  limits,  and  villas  were 
dotted  about  on  the  outlying  hills.  But  in  Nehemiah's 
day  the  city  was  confined  within  a  surprisingly  con- 
tracted area.  The  discovery  of  the  "Siloam  inscription/' 
leading  to  the  identification  of  the  gorge  known  to  the 


Nch   iii.]      "MARK   YE    JVELL   HER   BULlVARKSr  225 

Romans  as  the  Tyropccon  with  the  ancient  "  Valley  of 
Hinnom  "  or  "  Tophet,"  cuts  off  the  whole  of  the  modern 
Zion  from  the  site  of  the  ancient  city,  and  points  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  old  Zion  must  have  been  nearer 
Moriah,  and  all  Jerusalem  crowded  in  the  little  space  to 
the  east  of  the  chasm  which  was  once  thought  to  have 
run  up  through  the  middle  of  the  city.  No  doubt  the 
streets  were  narrow  ;  the  houses  may  have  been  high. 
Still  the  population  was  but  slender,  for  after  the  walls 
had  been  built  Nehemiah  found  the  space  he  had 
enclosed  too  large  for  the  inhabitants.*  But  our 
interest  in  Jerusalem  is  in  no  way  determined  by  her 
size,  or  by  the  number  of  her  citizens.  A  little  town 
in  a  remote  province,  she  was  politically  insignificant 
enough  when  viewed  from  the  standpoint  of  Babylon, 
and  in  comparison  with  the  many  rich  and  populous 
cities  of  the  vast  Persian  dominions.  It  is  the  more 
remarkable,  then,  that  successive  Persian  sovereigns 
should  have  bestowed  rare  favours  on  her.  From 
the  day  when  Solomon  built  his  temple,  the  unique 
glory  of  this  city  had  begun  to  appear.  Josiah's 
reformation  in  concentrating  the  national  worship  at 
Jerusalem  advanced  her  peculiar  privileges,  which  tlie 
rebuilding  of  the  temple  before  the  restoration  of  the 
city  further  promoted.  Jerusalem  is  the  religious 
metropolis  of  the  world.  To  be  first  in  religious  honour 
it  was  not  necessary  that  she  should  be  spacious  or 
populous.  Size  and  numbers  count  for  very  little  in 
religion.  Its  valuation  is  qualitative,  not  quantitative. 
Even  the  extent  of  its  influence,  even  the  size  and  mass 
of  this,  depends  mainly  on  its  character.  Moreover,  in 
Jerusalem,  as  a  rule,  the  really  effective  religious  life 


Neh.  xi.  I. 

15 


226  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

was  confined  to  a  small  group  of  the  ^'  pious  "  ;  some- 
times it  was  gathered  up  in  a  single  individual — a 
Jeremiah,  an  Ezra,  a  Nehemiah.  This  is  a  fact  replete 
with  encouragement  for  faith.  It  is  an  instance  of  the 
way  in  which  God  chooses  the  weak  things — weak  as 
to  this  world — to  confound  the  strong.  If  a  small  city 
could  once  take  the  unique  position  held  by  Jerusalem, 
then  why  should  not  a  small  Church  now  ?  And  if  a 
little  knot  of  earnest  men  within  the  city  could  be  the 
nucleus  of  her  character  and  the  source  of  her  influ- 
ence, why  should  not  quite  a  small  group  of  earnest 
people  give  a  character  to  their  Church,  and,  through 
the  Church,  work  wonders  in  the  world,  as  the  grain  of 
mustard  seed  could  move  a  mountain  ?  The  secret  of 
the  miracle  is,  like  the  secret  of  nature,  that  God  is  in 
the  city  and  the  Church,  as  God  is  in  the  seed.  When 
once  we  have  discovered  this  truth  as  a  certain  fact  of 
life  and  history,  our  estimate  of  the  relative  greatness  of 
things  is  revolutionised.  The  map  and  the  census  then 
cease  to  answer  our  most  pressing  questions.  The 
excellence  we  look  for  must  be  spiritual — vigour  of  faith, 
self-abnegation  of  love,  passion  of  zeal. 

As  we  follow  Nehemiah  round  the  circuit  of  the  walls 
the  more  special  features  of  the  city  are  brought  under 
our  notice.  He  begins  with  the  "  Sheep  Gate,"  which 
was  evidently  near  the  temple,  and  the  construction  of 
which  was  undertaken  by  the  priests  as  the  first  piece 
of  work  in  the  great  enterprise.  The  name  of  this  gate 
agrees  well  with  its  situation.  Opening  on  the  Valley 
of  the  Kidron,  and  facing  the  Mount  of  Olives  and  the 
lonely  pass  over  the  hills  towards  Jericho,  it  would 
be  the  gate  through  which  shepherds  would  bring  in 
their  flocks  from  the  wide  pasturage  of  the  wilderness. 
Possibly  there  was  a  market   at   the  open  space  just 


Neh.  iii.]      ''MARK   YE    IVELL   HER  BULIVARKS."  227 


inside.  The  vicinity  of  the  temple  would  make  it  easy 
to  bring  up  the  victims  for  the  sacrifices  by  this  way. 
As  the  Passover  season  approached,  the  whole  neigh- 
bourhood would  be  alive  with  the  bleating  of  thousands 
of  lambs.  Rich  associations  would  thus  cluster  round 
the  name  of  this  gate.  It  would  be  suggestive  of  the 
pastoral  life  so  much  pursued  by  the  men  of  Judah, 
whose  favourite  king  had  been  a  shepherd  lad  ;  and  it 
would  call  up  deeper  thoughts  of  the  mystery  of  sacrifice 
and  the  joy  of  the  Paschal  redemption  of  Israel.  To  us 
Christians  the  situation  of  the  ''  Sheep  Gate  "  has  a  far 
more  touching  significance.  It  seems  to  have  stood 
near  where  the  ''St.  Stephen's  Gate"  now  stands  ;  here, 
then,  would  be  the  way  most  used  by  our  Lord  in  coming 
to  and  fro  between  Jerusalem  and  Bethany,  the  way  by 
which  He  went  out  to  Gethsemane  on  the  last  night, 
and  probably  the  way  by  which  He  was  brought  back 
'*  as  a  sheep  "  among  her  shearers,  ''  as  a  lamb  "  led  to 
the  slaughter. 

Going  round  from  this  spot  northwards,  we  have  the 
part  of  the  wall  built  by  the  men  of  Jericho,  which 
would  still  look  east,  towards  their  own  city,  so  that  they 
would  always  see  their  work  when  they  got  their  first 
glimpse  of  Jerusalem  as  they  passed  over  the  ridge  of 
the  Mount  of  OHves  on  their  pilgrimages  up  to  the 
feasts.  The  task  of  the  men  of  Jericho  ended  at  one 
of  the  northern  gates,  the  construction  of  which,  to- 
gether with  the  fitting  of  its  ponderous  bolts  and  bars, 
was  considered  enough  for  another  group  of  builders. 
This  was  called  the  "  Fish  Gate."  Since  it  faced  north, 
it  would  scarcely  have  been  used  by  the  traders  who 
came  up  from  the  sea  fisheries  in  the  Mediterranean  ; 
it  must  have  received  the  fish  supply  from  the  Jordan, 
and  perhaps  from  as  far  as  the  Sea  of  Gahlee.     Still  its 


228  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER 


name  suggests  a  wider  range  of  commerce  than  the 
^'  Sheep  Gate,"  which  let  in  flocks  chiefly  from  neigh- 
bouring hills.  Jerusalem  was  in  a  singularly  isolated 
spot  for  the  capital  of  a  country,  one  chosen  expressly 
on  account  of  its  inaccessibility — the  very  opposite 
requisite  from  that  of  most  capitals,  which  are  planted 
by  navigable  rivers.  Nevertheless  she  maintained  com- 
munication, both  political  and  commercial,  with  distant 
towns  all  along  the  ages  of  her  chequered  history. 

After  passing  the  work  of  one  or  two  Jewish  famihes 
and  that  of  the  Tekoites,  memorable  for  the  painful 
fact  of  the  abstention  of  the  nobles,  we  come  to  the 
''  Old  Gate."  That  a  gate  should  bear  such  a  name 
would  lead  us  to  think  that  once  gates  had  not  been  so 
numerous  as  they  were  at  this  time.  Yet  most  probably 
the  "  Old  Gate  "  was  really  new,  because  very  little  of 
the  original  city  remained  above  ground.  But  men 
love  to  perpetuate  memories  of  the  past.  Even  what  is 
new  in  fact  may  acquire  a  flavour  of  age  by  the  force 
of  association.  The  wise  reformer  will  follow  the 
example  of  Nehemiah  in  hnking  the  new  on  to  the  old, 
and  preserving  the  venerable  associations  of  antiquity 
wherever  these  do  not  hinder  present  efficiency. 

Next  we  come  to  the  work  of  men  from  the  northern 
Benjamite  towns  of  Gibeonand  Mizpah,*  whose  volunteer 
service  was  a  mark  of  their  own  brotherly  spirit.  It 
should  be  remembered,  however,  that  Jerusalem  origin- 
ally belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  Working  at 
the  northern  wall,  in  accordance  with  the  rule  observed 
throughout  that  all  the  Jews  from  outlying  places 
should  build  in  the  direction  of  their  own  cities,  these 
Benjamites  carried  it  on  as  far  as  the  districts  of  the 

*  Neh.  iii.  7. 


Neh.  iii.l      ''MARK   YE   WELL   HER  BULWARKS"  229 


goldsmiths  and  apothecaries,*  whose  principal  bazaars 
seem  to  have  occupied  the  north  quarter  of  the  city — the 
quarter  most  suitable  for  trade,  because  first  reached  by 
most  travellers.  There,  however — if  we  are  to  accept 
the  generally  received  emendation  of  the  text  mentioned 
in  the  margin  of  the  Revised  Version — they  found  a  bit 
of  wall  tliat  had  escaped  destruction,  and  also  probably 
the  "  Ephraim  Gate,"  which  is  not  named  here,  although 
it  existed  in  the  days  of  Nehemiah.f  Inasmuch  as  the 
invasions  had  come  from  the  north,  and  the  recent 
Samaritan  raid  had  also  proceeded  from  the  same 
quarter,  it  seems  likely  that  the  city  had  been  taken  on 
this  side.  If  so,  the  enemy,  after  having  got  in  through 
a  gate  which  they  had  burnt,  or  through  a  breach  in  the 
wall,  did  not  think  it  necessary  to  waste  time  in  the 
heavy  labour  of  tearing  down  the  wall  in  their  rear. 
Perhaps  as  this  was  the  most  exposed  quarter,  the 
wall  was  most  solid  here — it  was  known  as  ''the  broad 
wall."  The  wealthy  goldsmiths  would  have  been 
anxious  that  their  bazaars  should  not  be  the  first  parts 
of  the  city  to  entertain  a  marauding  host  through  any 
weakness  in  the  defences.  The  next  bit  of  wall  was 
in  the  hands  of  a  man  of  some  importance,  known  as 
"  the  ruler  of  half  the  district  of  Jerusalem  "  ;  ±  /.<?.,  he 
had  the  management  of  half  the  land  belonging  to  the 
city — either  a  sort  of  police  supervision  of  private  estates, 
or  the  direct  control  of  land  owned  by  the  municipality, 
and  possibly  farmed  for  the  time  being  on  communal 
principles. 

Still  following  the  northern  wall,  we  pass  the  work  of 
several  Jerusalem  families,  and  so  on  to  the  potteries, 
as  we  may  infer  from   the   remark  about  ''  the  tower 


*  Neh.  iii.  8.  f  Neh.  viii.  16.  J  Neh.  iii.  9. 


230  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


of  the  furnaces^  *  Here  we  must  be  at  the  ^'  Corner 
Gate,"  t  which,  however,  is  not  now  named  ;  *'  the  tower 
of  the  furnaces  "  may  have  been  part  of  its  fortifications. 
Evidently  this  was  an  important  position.  The  manager 
of  the  second  half  of  the  city  estates  and  the  villages 
on  them — knovm  as  '^his  daughters  "—had  the  charge 
of  the  work  here.  It  was  four  hundred  cubits  from  the 
^'Ephraim  Gate"  to  the  corner.J  At  this  point  the 
long  north  wall  ends,  and  the  fortifications  take  a  sharp 
turn  southwards.  Following  the  nev>r  direction,  we 
pass  by  the  course  of  the  Valley  of  Hinnom,  leaving  it 
on  our  right.  The  next  gate  we  meet  is  named  after 
this  ravine  of  evil  omen  the  "  Valley  Gate."  It  would 
be  here  that  the  poor  children,  victims  to  the  savage 
Moloch  worship,  had  been  led  out  to  their  fate.  The 
name  of  the  gate  would  be  a  perpetual  reminder  of 
the  darkest  passage  in  the  old  city's  history  of  sin  and 
shame.  The  gate  would  face  west,  and,  in  accordance 
with  the  arrangemient  throughout,  the  inhabitants  of 
Zanoah,  a  town  lying  out  from  Jerusalem  ten  miles  in 
that  direction,  undertook  the  erection  of  it.  They  also 
had  charge  of  a  thousand  cubits  of  wall — an  exception- 
ally long  piece ;  but  the  gates  were  fewer  on  this  side, 
and  here  possibly  the  steepness  of  the  cliff  rendered  a 
slighter  wall  sufficient. 

This  long,  unbroken  stretch  of  wall  ends  at  the  "Dung 
Gate,"  through  which  the  refuse  of  the  city  was  flung 
out  to  the  now  degraded  valley  which  once  had  been 
so  famous  for  its  pleasure  gardens.  Sanitary  regulations 
are  of  course  most  necessary.  We  admire  the  minute- 
ness with  which  they  are  attended  to  in  the  Pentateuch, 


*  Neh.  iii.  II.  f  2  Chron.  xxvi.  9  ;  Jer.  xxxi.  38. 

I   2  Kings  xiv.  13. 


Neh.  iii.]      "MARK   YE    WELL  HER  BULWARKS: 


and  we  regard  the  filthy  condition  of  modern  eastern 
cities  as  a  sign  of  neglect  and  decay.  Still  the  adorn- 
ment of  a  grand  gateway  by  the  temple,  or  the  solid 
building  of  a  noble  approach  to  the  city  along  the  main 
route  from  the  north,  would  be  a  more  popular  under- 
taking than  this  construction  of  a  "  Dung  Gate."  It  is 
to  the  credit  of  Nehemiah's  admirable  skill  in  organisa- 
tion that  no  difficulty  was  found  in  filling  up  the  less 
attractive  parts  of  his  programme,  and  it  is  even  more 
to  the  credit  of  those  who  accepted  the  allotment  of 
them  that,  as  far  as  we  know,  they  made  no  complaint. 
A  common  zeal  for  the  public  good  overcame  personal 
prejudices.  The  just  and  firm  application  of  a  universal 
rule  is  a  great  preventative  of  complaints  in  such  a  case. 
When  the  several  bands  of  workers  were  to  undertake 
the  districts  opposite  their  own  houses  if  they  were 
inhabitants  of  the  city,  or  opposite  their  own  towns  if 
they  were  provincial  Jews,  it  would  be  difficult  for  any 
of  them  to  frame  a  complaint.  The  builders  of  the 
"  Dung  Gate "  came,  it  would  seem,  from  the  most 
conspicuous  eminence  in  the  wilderness  of  Southern 
Judaea — that  now  known  as  the  "Frank  Mountain." 
The  people  who  would  take  to  such  an  out-of-the-world 
place  of  abode  would  hardly  be  such  as  we  should  look 
to  for  work  requiring  fineness  of  finish.  Perhaps  they 
were  more  suited  to  the  unpretentious  task  which  fell 
to  their  lot.  Still  this  consideration  does  not  detract 
from  the  credit  of  their  good-natured  acquiescence,  for 
self-seeking  people  are  the  last  to  admit  that  they  are 
not  fit  for  the  best  places. 

The  next  gate  was  in  a  very  interesting  position 
at  the  south-west  corner,  where  the  Tyropceon  runs 
down  to  the  Valley  of  the  Kidron.  It  was  called  the 
"  Fountain  Gate,"  perhaps  after  the  one  natural  spring 


232  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

which  Jerusalem  possesses — that  now  known  as  the 
"  Virgin's  Fountain,"  and  near  to  the  Pool  of  Siloam, 
where  the  precious  water  from  this  spring  was  stored. 
The  very  name  of  the  gate  would  call  up  thoughts  of 
the  value  of  its  site  in  times  of  siege,  when  the  fountain 
had  to  be  *'  sealed  "  or  covered  over,  to  save  it  from 
being  tampered  with  by  the  enemy.  Close  by  is  a 
flight  of  steps,  still  extant,  that  formerly  led  down  to 
the  king's  garden.  We  are  now  near  to  Zion,  in  what 
was  once  the  favourite  and  most  aristocratic  portion  of 
the  town.  The  lowering  of  the  top  of  Zion  in  the  time 
of  the  Maccabees,  that  it  might  not  overlook  the  temple 
on  Mount  Moriah,  and  the  filling  up  of  the  ravine?., 
considerably  detract  from  the  once  imposing  height  of 
this  quarter  of  the  city.  Here  ancient  Jerusalem  had 
looked  superb — like  an  eagle  perched  on  a  rock.  With 
such  a  fortress  as  Zion  her  short-sighted  citizens  had 
thought  her  impregnable ;  but  Nehemiah's  contem- 
poraries were  humbler  and  wiser  men  than  the  in- 
fatuated Jews  who  had  rejected  the  warnings  of 
Jerem.iah. 

The  adjoining  piece  of  wail  brings  us  round  to  the 
tombs  of  the  kings,  which,  according  to  the  custom  of 
antiquity,  as  we  learn  from  a  cuneiform  inscription  at 
Babylon,  were  within  the  city  walls,  although  the  tombs 
of  less  important  people  were  outside — just  as  to  this 
day  we  bury  our  illustrious  dead  in  the  heart  of  the 
metropolis.  Nehemiah  had  been  moved  at  the  first 
report  of  the  ruin  of  Jerusalem  by  the  thought  that  his 
fathers'  sepulchres  were  there. 

From  this  spot  it  is  not  so  easy  to  trace  the  remainder 
of  the  wall.  The  mention  of  the  Levites  has  given  rise 
to  the  opinion  that  Nehemiah  now  takes  us  at  once  to 
the  temple  again ;  but  this  is  hardly  possible  in  view 


Neh.iii.]      ''MARK   YE   WELL  HER  BULWARKS."  233 


of  his  subsequent  statements.  We  must  first  work 
round  by  Ophel,  the  ''Water,"  the  "East,"  and  the 
"Horse"  Gates — all  of  them  apparently  leading  out 
towards  the  Valley  of  the  Kidron.  Levites  and  Priests, 
whose  quarters  we  are  gradually  approaching,  and 
other  inhabitants  of  houses  in  this  district,  together 
with  people  from  the  Jordan  Valley  and  the  east  country, 
carried  out  this  last  piece  of  work  as  far  as  a  great 
tower  standing  out  between  Ophel  and  the  corner  of  the 
temple  wall,  a  tower  so  massive  that  some  of  its  masonry 
can  be  seen  still  standing.  But  the  narrative  is  here 
so  obscure,  and  the  sites  have  been  so  altered  by  the 
ravages  of  war  and  time,  that  the  identification  of  most 
of  them  in  this  direction  baffles  inquiry. 

"  Mark  ye  well  her  bulwarks."  Alas  !  they  are  buried 
in  a  desolation  so  huge  that  the  utmost  skill  of  engi- 
neering science  fails  to  trace  their  course.  The  latest 
great  discovery,  which  has  simply  revolutionised  the 
map  by  identifying  the  Tyropaon  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment "Valley  of  Hinnom"  or  "Tophet,"  is  the  most 
striking  sign  of  these  topographical  difficulties.  The 
valley  itself  has  been  filled  up  with  masses  of  rub- 
bish, the  sight  of  which  to-day  confirms  the  dreadful 
tragedy  of  the  history  of  Jerusalem,  the  most  tragic 
history  on  record.  No  city  was  ever  more  favoured 
by  Heaven,  and  no  city  was  ever  more  afflicted.  Hers 
were  the  most  magnificent  endowments,  the  highest 
ideals,  the  fairest  promises ;  hers  too  was  the  most 
miserable  failure.  Her  beauty  ravaged,  her  sanctity 
defiled,  her  light  extinguished,  her  joy  turned  into 
bitterness.  Heaven's  bride  has  been  treated  as  the  scum 
of  the  streets.  And  now,  after  being  abused  by  her 
own  children,  shattered  by  the  Babylonian,  outraged  by 
the  Syrian,  demoHshed  by  the  Roman,  the  city  which 


234  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


Stoned  her  prophets  and  clamoured  successfully  for  the 
death  of  her  Saviour  has  again  revived  in  poverty  and 
misery — the  pale  ghost  of  her  past,  still  the  victim  of 
the  oppressor.  The  witchery  of  this  wonderful  city 
fascinates  us  to-day,  and  the  very  syllables  of  her  name 
"  Jerusalem  "  sound  strangely  sweet  and  ineffably  sad — 

"Most  musical,  most  melancholy." 

It  was  fitting  that  the  tenderest,  most  mournful  lament 
ever  uttered  should  have  been  called  forth  by  our  Lord's 
contemplation  of  such  a  city — a  city  which,  deeming 
herself  destined  to  be  the  joy  of  all  the  earth,  became 
the  plague-spot  of  history. 


CHAPTER   XXI. 

ON  GUARD. 

Nehemiah  ii.  lo,  19;  iv. 

ALL  his  arrangements  for  rebuilding  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem  show  that  Nehemiah  was  awake  to  the 
dangers  with  which  he  was  surrounded.  The  secrecy 
of  his  night  ride  was  evidently  intended  to  prevent  a 
premature  revelation  of  his  plans.  The  thorough  organi- 
sation, the  mapping  out  of  the  whole  line  of  the  wall, 
and  the  dividing  of  the  building  operations  among  forty- 
two  bands  of  workpeople,  secured  equal  and  rapid 
progress  on  all  sides.  Evidently  the  idea  was  to  "rush" 
the  work,  and  to  have  it  fairly  well  advanced,  so  as  to 
afford  a  real  protection  for  the  citizens,  before  any 
successful  attempts  to  frustrate  it  could  be  carried  out. 
Even  with  all  these  precautions,  Nehemiah  was  harassed 
and  hindered  for  a  time  by  the  malignant  devices  of 
his  enemies.  It  was  only  to  be  expected  that  he  would 
meet  with  opposition.  But  a  few  years  before  all  the 
Syrian  colonists  had  united  in  extracting  an  order  from 
Artaxerxes  for  the  arrest  of  the  earlier  work  of  building 
the  walls,  because  the  Jews  had  made  themselves 
intensely  obnoxious  to  their  neighbours  by  sending 
back  the  wives  they  had  married  from  among  the 
Gentile  peoples.  The  jealous}^  of  Samaria,  which  had 
taken  the  lead  in  Palestine  so  long  as  Jerusalem  was  in 


236       EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

evidence,  envenomed  this  animosity  still  more.  Was 
it  likely  then  that  her  watchful  foes  would  hear  with 
equanimity  of  the  revival  of  the  hated  city — a  city  which 
must  have  seemed  to  them  the  very  embodiment  of  the 
anti-social  spirit  ? 

Now,  however,  since  a  favourite  servant  of  the  Great 
King  had  been  appointed  governor  of  Jerusalem,  the 
Satrap  of  the  Syrian  provinces  could  scarcely  be  ex- 
pected to  interfere.  Therefore  the  initiative  fell  into 
the  hands  of  smaller  men,  who  found  it  necessary  to 
abandon  the  method  of  direct  hostility,  and  to  proceed 
by  means  of  intrigues  and  ambuscades.  There  were 
three  who  made  themselves  notorious  in  this  undignified 
course  of  procedure.  Two  of  them  are  mentioned  in 
connection  with  the  journey  of  Nehemiah  up  to  Jeru- 
salem.* The  first,  the  head  of  the  whole  opposition, 
is  Sanballat,  who  is  called  the  Horonite,  seemingly 
because  he  is  a  native  of  one  of  the  Beth-horons,  and 
who  appears  to  be  the  governor  of  the  city  of  Samaria, 
although  this  is  not  stated.  Throughout  the  history 
he  comes  before  us  repeatedly  as  the  foe  of  the  rival 
governor  of  Jerusalem.  Next  to  him  comes  Tobiah,  a 
chief  of  the  little  trans-Jordanic  tribe  of  the  Ammonites, 
some  of  whom  had  got  into  Samaria  in  the  strange 
mixing  up  of  peoples  after  the  Babylonian  conquest. 
He  is  called  the  servant,  possibly  because  he  once  held 
some  post  at  court,  and  if  so  he  may  have  been  person- 
ally jealous  of  Nehemiah's  promotion. 

Sanballat  and  his  supporter  Tobiah  were  subse- 
quently joined  by  an  Arabian  Emir  -named  Geshem. 
His  presence  in  the  group  of  conspirators  would  be 
surprising  if  we   had  not  been  unexpectedly  supplied 

*  Neh.  ii.  lo, 


Neh.  ii.  lo,  19;  iv.]  ON  GUARD.  237 


with  the  means  of  accounting  for  it  in  the  recently 
deciphered  inscription  which  tells  how  Sargon  imported 
an  Arabian  colony  into  Samaria.  The  Arab  would 
scent  prey  in  the  project  of  a  warlike  expedition. 

The  opposition  proceeded  warily.  At  first  we  are 
only  told  that  when  Sanballat  and  his  friend  Tobiah 
heard  of  the  coming  of  Nehemiah,  ^*  it  grieved  them 
exceedingly  that  there  was  come  a  man  to  seek  the 
welfare  of  the  children  of  Israel."*  In  writing  these 
caustic  words  Nehemiah  implies  that  the  jealous  men 
had  no  occasion  to  fear  that  he  meant  any  harm  to 
them,  and  that  they  knew  this.  It  seems  very  hard  to 
him,  then,  that  they  should  begrudge  any  alleviation  of 
the  misery  of  the  poor  citizens  of  Jerusalem.  What 
was  that  to  them  ?  Jealousy  might  foresee  the 
possibility  of  future  loss  from  the  recovery  of  the  rival 
city,  and  in  this  they  might  find  the  excuse  for  their 
action,  an  excuse  for  not  anticipating  which  so  fervent 
a  patriot  as  Nehemiah  may  be  forgiven  ;  nevertheless 
the  most  greedy  sense  of  self-interest  on  the  part  of 
these  men  is  lost  sight  of  in  the  virulence  of  their  hatred 
to  the  Jews.  This  is  always  the  case  with  that  cruel 
infatuation — the  Anti-Semitic  rage.  Here  it  is  that 
hatred  passes  beyond  mere  anger.  Hatred  is  actually 
pained  at  the  welfare  of  its  object.  It  suffers  from  a 
Satanic  misery.  The  venom  which  it  fails  to  plant  in 
its  victim  rankles  in  its  own  breast. 

At  first  we  only  hear  of  this  odious  distress  of  the 
jealous  neighbours.  But  the  prosecutions  of  Nehemiah's 
designs  immediately  lead  to  a  manifestation  of  open 
hostility — verbal  in  the  beginning.  No  sooner  had  the 
Jews  made  it  evident    that    they  v/ere   responsive    to 

*  Neh.  ii.  10. 


238  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

their  leader's  appeal  and  intended  to  rise  and  build,  than 
they  were  assailed  with  mockery.  The  Samaritan  and 
Ammonite  leaders  were  now  joined  by  the  Arabian,  and 
together  they  sent  a  message  of  scorn  and  contempt, 
asking  the  handful  of  poor  Jews  Vv^hether  they  were 
fortifying  the  city  in  order  to  rebel  against  the  king. 
The  charge  of  a  similar  intention  had  been  the  cause 
of  stopping  the  work  on  the  previous  occasion.* 
Now  that  Artaxerxes'  favourite  cup-bearer  was  at  the 
head  of  affairs,  any  suspicion  of  treason  was  absurd  ; 
but  since  hatred  is  singularly  blind — far  more  blind 
than  love — it  is  barely  possible  that  the  malignant 
mockers  hoped  to  raise  a  suspicion.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  is  no  evidence  to  show  that  they  followed  the 
example  of  the  previous  opposition  and  reported  to 
headquarters.  For  the  present  they  seem  to  have 
contented  themselves  with  bitter  raillery.  This  is  a 
weapon  before  which  weak  men  too  often  give  way. 
But  Nehemiah  was  not  so  foolish  as  to  succumb  beneath 
a  shower  of  poor,  ill-natured  jokes. 

His  answer  is  firm  and  dignified. f  It  contains  three 
assertions.  The  first  is  the  most  important.  Nehemiah 
is  not  ashamed  to  confess  the  faith  which  is  the  source 
of  all  his  confidence.  In  the  eyes  of  men  the  Jews 
may  appear  but  a  feeble  folk,  quite  unequal  to  the  task 
of  holding  their  ground  in  the  midst  of  a  swarm  of  angry 
foes.  If  Nehemiah  had  only  taken  account  of  the  political 
and  military  aspects  of  affairs,  he  might  have  shrunk 
from  proceeding.  But  it  is  just  the  mark  of  his  true 
greatness  that  he  always  has  his  eye  fixed  on  a  Higher 
\  Power.  He  knows  that  God  is  in  the  project,  and 
\ therefore  he  is   sure   that  it  must  prosper.     When  a 


*  Ezra  iv.  13.  ■\  Neh.  ii.  20, 


Nell.  ii.  lo,  19;  iv.]  ON   GUARD.  239 

man  can  reach  this  conviction,  mockery  and  insult  doi 
not  move  him.  He  has  cHmbed  to  a  serene  altitude, ' 
from  which  he  can  look  down  with  equanimity  on  the 
boiling  clouds  that  are  now  far  beneath  his  feet. 
Having  this  sublime  ground  of  confidence,  Nehemiah  is 
able  to  proceed  to  his  second  point — his  assertion  of  the 
determination  of  the  Jews  to  arise  and  build.  This  is 
quite  positive  and  absolute.  The  brave  man  states  it, 
too,  in  the  clearest  possible  language.  Now  the  work 
is  about  to  begin  there  is  to  be  no  subterfuge  or 
disguise.  Nehemiah's  unflinching  determination  is 
based  on  the  religious  confession  that  precedes  it.  The 
Jews  are  God's  servants  ;  they  are  engaged  in  His 
work ;  they  know  He  will  prosper  them  ;  therefore  they 
most  certainly  will  not  stay  their  hand  for  all  the 
gibes  and  taunts  of  their  neighbours.  Lastly,  Nehemiah 
contemptuously  repudiates  the  claim  of  these  impertinent 
intruders  to  interfere  in  the  work  of  the  Jews  ;  he  tells 
them  that  they  have  no  excuse  for  their  meddling,  for 
they  own  no  property  in  Jerusalem,  they  have  no  right 
of  citizenship  or  of  control  from  without,  and  there  are 
no  tombs  of  their  ancestors  in  the  sacred  city. 

In  this  message  of  Nehemiah's  we  seem  to  hear  an 
echo  of  the  old  words  with  which  the  temple-builders 
rejected  the  offer  of  assistance  from  the  Samaritans,  and 
which  were  the  beginning  of  the  whole  course  of  jealous 
antagonism  on  the  part  of  the  irritated  neighbours. 
But  the  circumstances  are  entirely  altered.  It  is  not  a 
friendly  offer  of  co-operation,  but  its  very  opposite,  a 
hostile  and  insulting  message  designed  to  hinder  the 
Jews,  that  is  here  so  proudly  resented.  In  the  reply  of 
Nehemiah  we  hear  the  Church  refusing  to  bend  to  the 
will  of  the  world,  because  the  world  has  no  right  to 
trespass  on   her   territory.       God's  work  is  not  to  be 


240  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

tampered  with  by  insolent  meddlers.  Jewish  exclusive- 
ness  is  painfully  narrow,  at  least  in  our  estimation  of 
it,  when  it  refuses  to  welcome  strangers  or  to  recognise 
the  good  that  lies  outside  the  sacred  enclosure  ;  but 
this  same  characteristic  becomes  a  noble  quality,  with 
high  ethical  and  religious  aims,  when  it  firmly  refuses 
to  surrender  its  duty  to  God  at  the  bidding  of  the  outside 
world.  The  Christian  can  scarcely  imitate  Nehemiah's 
tone  and  temper  in  this  matter  ;  and  yet  if  he  is  loyal 
to  his  God  he  will  feel  that  he  must  be  equally  decided 
and  uncompromising  in  declining  to  give  up  any  part  of 
what  he  believes  to  be  his  service  of  Christ  to  please 
men  who  unhappily  as  yet  have  "  no  part,  or  right,  or 
memorial  "  in  the  New  Jerusalem  ;  although,  unhke  the 
Jew  of  old,  he  will  be  only  too  glad  that  all  men  should 
come  in  and  share  his  privileges. 

After  receiving  an  annoying  answer  it  was  only  natural 
that  the  antagonistic  neighbours  of  the  Jews  should  be 
still  more  embittered  in  their  animosity.  At  the  first 
news  of  his  coming  to  befriend  the  children  of  Israel,  as 
Nehemiah  says,  Sanballat  and  Tobiah  were  grieved  ;  but 
when  the  building  operations  were  actually  in  process 
the  Samaritan  leader  passed  from  vexation  to  rage — 
*'  he  was  wroth  and  took  great  indignation."  *  This 
man  now  assumed  the  lead  in  opposition  to  the  Jews. 
His  mockery  became  more  bitter  and  insulting.  In 
this  he  was  joined  by  his  friend  the  Ammonite,  who 
declared  that  if  only  one  of  the  foxes  that  prowl  on  the 
neighbouring  hills  were  to  jump  upon  the  wall  the 
creature  would  break  it  down.t  Perhaps  he  had 
received  a-  hint  from  some  of  his  spies  that  the  new 
work  that  had  been  so  hastily  pressed  forward  was  not 

*  Nch.  iv.  I.  t  Neh.  iv.  3. 


Nch.  ii.  lo,  I9;iv.]  ON   GUARD.  241 

any  too  solid.  The  '*  Palestine  Exploration  Fund  "  has 
brought  to  light  the  foundations  of  what  is  believed  to 
be  a  part  of  Nehemiah's  wall  at  Ophel,  and  the  base  of 
it  is  seen  to  be  of  rubble,  not  founded  on  the  rock,  but 
built  on  the  clay  above,  so  that  it  has  been  possible  to 
drive  a  mine  under  it  from  one  side  to  the  other — a 
rough  piece  of  work,  very  different  from  the  beautifully 
finished  temple  walls."*^ 

Nehemiah  met  the  renewed  shower  of  insults  in  a 
startling  manner.  He  cursed  his  enemies. f  Deploring 
before  God  the  contempt  that  was  heaped  on  the  Jews, 
he  prayed  that  the  reproach  of  the  enemies  might  be 
turned  on  their  own  head,  devoted  them  to  the  horrors 
of  a  new  captivity,  and  even  went  so  far  as  to  beg 
that  no  atonement  might  be  found  for  their  iniquity, 
that  their  sin  might  not  be  blotted  out.  In  a  word, 
instead  of  himself  forgiving  his  enemies,  he  besought 
that  they  might  not  be  forgiven  by  God.  We  shudder 
as  we  read  his  terrible  words.  This  is  not  the  Christ 
spirit.  It  is  even  contrary  to  the  less  merciful  spirit  of 
the  Old  Testament.  Yet,  to  be  just  to  Nehemiah,  we 
must  consider  the  whole  case.  It  is  most  unfair  to 
tear  his  curse  out  of  the  history  and  gibbet  it  as  a 
specimen  of  Jewish  piety.  Even  strong  men  who  will 
not  give  way  before  ridicule  may  feel  its  stabs — for 
strength  is  not  inconsistent  with  sensitiveness.  Evi- 
dently Nehemiah  was  irritated ;  but  then  he  was  much 
provoked.  For  the  moment  he  lost  his  self-possession. 
We  must  remember  that  the  strain  of  his  great  under- 
taking was  most  exhausting,  and  we  must  be  patient 
with  the  utterances  of  one  so  sorely  tried.  If  lethargic 
people  criticise  adversely  the  hasty  utterances  of  a  more 


*   Conder,  "  Bible  Geograph}',"  p.  131.  |  Neh.  \\\  4. 

16 


242  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

intense  nature,  they  forget  that,  though  they  may  never 
lose  their  self-control,  neither  do  they  ever  rouse  them- 
selves to  the  daring  energy  of  the  man  whose  failings 
they  blame.  Then  it  was  not  any  personal  insults 
hurled  against  himself  that  Nehemiah  resented  so 
fiercely.  It  was  his  work  that  the  Samaritans  were 
trying  to  hinder.  This  he  believed  to  be  really  God's 
work,  so  that  the  insults  offered  to  the  Jews  were  also 
directed  against  God,  who  must  have  been  angry  also. 
We  cannot  justify  the  curse  by  the  standard  of  the 
Christian  law;  but  it  is  not  reasonable  to  apply  that 
standard  to  it.  We  must  set  it  by  the  side  of  the 
Maledictory  Psalms.  From  the  standpoint  of  its  author 
it  can  be  fully  accounted  for.  To  say  that  even  in  this 
way  it  can  be  defended,  however,  is  to  go  too  far.  We 
have  no  occasion  to  persuade  ourselves  that  any  of  the 
Old  Testament  saints  were  immaculate,  even  in  the 
light  of  Judaism.  Nehemiah  was  a  great  and  good 
man,  yet  he  was  not  an  Old  Testament  Christ. 

But  now  more  serious  opposition  was  to  be  en- 
countered. Such  enemies  as  those  angry  men  of 
Samaria  were  not  likely  to  be  content  v/ith  venting 
their  spleen  in  idle  mockery.  When  they  saw  that  the 
keenest  shafts  of  their  wit  failed  to  stop  the  work  of 
the  citizens  of  Jerusalem,  Sanballat  and  his  friends 
found  it  necessary  to  proceed  to  more  active  measures, 
and  accordingly  they  entered  into  a  conspiracy  for  the 
double  purpose  of  carrying  on  actual  warfare  and  of 
intriguing  with  disaffected  citizens  of  Jerusalem — "  to 
cause  confusion  therein."  *  Nehemiah  v/as  too  ob- 
servant and  penetrating  a  statesman  not  to  become 
aware  of  what  was  going  on ;  the  knowledge  that  the 


*  Neh.  iv.  8,  II. 


Neh.  ii.  lo,  iq;  iv.]  ON   GUARD.  243 

plots  existed  revealed  the  extent  of  his  danger,  and 
compelled  him  to  make  active  preparations  for  thwart- 
ing them.  We  may  notice  several  important  points  in 
the  process  of  the  defence. 

1.  Prayer. — This  was  the  first,  and  in  Nehemiah's 
mind  the  most  essential  defensive  measure.  We  find 
iiim  resorting  to  it  in  every  important  juncture  of  his 
life.  It  is  his  sheet-anchor.  But  now  he  uses  the 
plural  number.  Hitherto  we  have  met  only  with  his 
private  prayers.  In  the  present  case  he  sayS;  "  We 
made  our  prayer  unto  our  God."  *  Had  the  infection 
of  his  prayerful  spirit  reached  his  fellow-citizens, 
so  that  they  now  shared  it  ?  Was  it  that  the 
imminence  of  fearful  danger  drove  to  prayer  men 
who  under  ordinary  circumstances  forgot  their  need  of 
God  ?  Or  were  both  influences  at  work  ?  However 
it  was  brought  about,  this  association  in  prayer  of  some 
of  the  Jews  with  their  governor  must  have  been  the 
greatest  comfort  to  him,  as  it  was  the  best  ground  for 
the  hope  that  God  would  not  now  let  them  fall  into 
the  hands  of  the  enemy.  Hitherto  there  had  been  a 
melancholy  solitariness  about  the  earnest  devotion  of 
Nehemiah.  The  success  of  his  mission  began  to  show 
itself  when  the  citizens  began  to  participate  in  the  same 
spirit  of  devotion. 

2.  Watchfulness. — Nehemiah  was  not  the  fanatic  to 
blunder  into  the  delusion  that  prayer  was  a  substitute 
for  duty,  instead  of  being  its  inspiration.  All  that 
followed  the  prayer  was  really  based  upon  it.  The 
calmness,  hope,  and  courage  won  in  the  high  act  of 
communion  with  God  made  it  possible  to  take  the 
necessary  steps  in  the  outer  world.     Since  the  greatest 


♦  Neh.  iv.  9. 


244  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

danger  was  not  expected  as  an  open  assault,  it  was 
most  necessary  that  an  unbroken  watch  should  be 
maintained,  day  and  night.  Nehemiah  had  spies  out 
in  the  surrounding  country,  who  reported  to  him 
every  planned  attack.  So  thorough  was  this  system 
of  espionage,  that  though  no  less  than  ten  plots  were 
concocted  by  the  enemy,  they  were  all  discovered  to 
Nehemiah,  and  all  frustrated  by  him. 

3.  Encouragement. — The  Jews  were  losing  heart. 
The  men  of  Judah  came  to  Nehemiah  with  the  com- 
plaint that  the  labourers  who  were  at  work  on  the 
great  heaps  of  rubbish  were  suffering  from  exhaus- 
tion. The  reduction  in  the  numbers  of  workmen, 
owing  to  the  appointment  of  the  guard,  would  have 
still  further  increased  the  strain  of  those  who  were 
left  to  toil  among  the  mounds.  But  it  would  have 
been  fatal  to  draw  back  at  this  juncture.  That  would 
have  been  to  invite  the  enemy  to  rush  in  and  complete 
the  discomfiture  of  the  Jews.  On  Nehemiah  came  the 
obligation  of  cheering  the  dispirited  citizens.  Even 
the  leading  men,  who  should  have  rallied  the  people, 
like  officers  at  the  head  of  their  troops,  shared  the 
general  depression.  Nehemiah  was  again  alone — or  at 
best  supported  by  the  silent  sympathy  of  his  com- 
panions in  prayer.  There  was  very  nearly  a  panic ; 
and  for  one  man  to  stand  out  under  such  circumstances 
as  these  in  soHtary  courage,  not  only  resisting  the  strong 
contagion  of  fear,  but  stemming  the  tide  and  counter- 
acting its  movement,  this  would  be  indeed  the  sublimity 
of  heroism.  It  was  a  severe  test  for  Nehemiah ;  and 
he  came  out  of  it  triumphant.  His  faith  was  the  in- 
spiration of  his  own  courage,  and  it  became  the  ground 
for  the  encouragement  of  others.  He  addressed  the 
people  and  their  nobles  in  a  spirited  appeal.     First,  he 


Nch.  ii.  10,  19;  iv.]  ON  GUARD.  245 


exhorted  them  to  banish  fear.  The  very  tone  of  his 
voice  must  have  been  reassuring  ;  the  presence  of  one 
brave  man  in  a  crowd  of  cowards  often  shames  them 
out  of  their  weakness.  But  Nehemiah  proceeded  to 
give  reasons  for  his  encouragement.  Let  the  men 
remember  their  God  Jehovah,  how  great  and  terrible 
He  is  !  The  cause  is  Plis,  and  His  might  and  terror 
will  defend  it.  Let  them  think  of  their  people  and  their 
families,  and  fight  for  brethren  and  children,  for  wives 
and  homes !  Cowardice  is  unbelief  and  selfishness 
combined.  Trust  in  God  and  a  sense  of  duty  to  others 
will  master  the  weakness. 

4.  Arms. — Nehemiah  gave  the  first  place  to  the  spiri- 
tual and  moral  defences  of  Jerusalem.  Yet  his  material 
defences  were  none  the  less  thorough  on  account  of 
his  prayers  to  God  or  his  eloquent  exhortation  of  the 
people  and  their  leaders.     They  were  most  complete. 

His  arrangements  for  the  military  protection  of 
Jerusalem  converted  the  whole  city  into  an  armed 
camp.  Half  the  citizens  in  turn  were  to  leave  their 
work,  and  stand  at  arras  with  swords  and  spears  and 
bows.  Even  in  the  midst  of  the  building  operations 
the  clatter  of  weapons  was  heard  among  the  stones, 
because  the  masons  at  work  on  the  walls  and  the 
labourers  while  they  poised  on  their  heads  baskets  full 
of  rubbish  from  the  excavations  had  swords  attached 
to  their  sashes.  Residents  of  the  suburbs  were  re- 
quired to  stay  in  the  city  instead  of  returning  home  for 
the  night,  and  no  man  could  put  off  a  single  article  of 
clothing  when  he  lay  down  to  sleep.  Nor  was  this 
martial  array  deemed  sufficient  without  some  special 
provision  against  a  surprise.  Nehemiah  therefore 
went  about  with  a  trumpeter,  ready  to  summon  all 
hands  to  any  point  of  danger  on  the  first  alarm. 


246  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


Still,  though  the  Jews  were  hampered  with  these 
preparations  for  battle,  tired  with  toil  and  watching, 
and  troubled  by  dreadful  apprehensions,  the  work 
went  on.  This  is  a  great  proof  of  the  excellency  of 
Nehemiah's  generalship.  He  did  not  sacrifice  the 
building  to  the  fighting.  The  former  was  itself 
designed  to  produce  a  permanent  defence,  while  the 
arms  were  only  for  temporary  use.  When  the  walls 
were  up  the  citizens  could  give  the  laugh  back  to  their 
foes.  But  in  itself  the  very  act  of  working  was  re- 
assuring. Idleness  is  a  prey  to  fears  which  industry 
has  no  time  to  entertain.  Every  man  who  tries  to  do 
his  duty  as  a  servant  of  God  is  unconsciously  building 
a  wall  about  himself  that  will  be  his  shelter  in  the  hour 
of  peril. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

USURY. 

Nehemiah  v. 

WE  open  the  fifth  chapter  of  "  Nehemiah "  with  a 
shock  of  pain.  The  previous  chapter  described 
a  scene  of  patriotic  devotion  in  which  nearly  all  the 
people  were  united  for  the  prosecution  of  one  great 
purpose.  There  we  saw  the  priests  and  the  wealthy 
citizens  side  by  side  with  their  humble  brethren  en- 
gaged in  the  common  task  of  building  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem  and  guarding  the  city  against  assault.  The 
heartiness  with  which  the  work  Vv^as  first  undertaken, 
the  readiness  of  all  classes  to  resume  it  after  temporary 
discouragements,  and  the  martial  spirit  shown  by  the 
whole  population  in  standing  under  arms  in  the  prose- 
cution of  it,  determined  to  resist  any  interference  from 
without,  were  all  signs  of  a  large-minded  zeal  in  which 
we  should  have  expected  private  interests  to  have  given 
place  to  the  public  necessities  of  the  hour.  But  now 
we  are  compelled  to  look  at  the  seamy  side  of  city 
life.  In  the  midst  of  the  unavoidable  toils  and 
dangers  occasioned  by  the  animosity  of  the  Samaritans, 
miserable  internal  troubles  had  broken  out  among  the 
Jews ;  and  the  perplexing  problems  which  seem  to  be 
inseparable  from  the  gathering  together  of  a  number  of 
people  under  any  known  past  or  present  social  system 


248  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

had  developed  in  the  most  acute  form.  The  gulf  be- 
tween the  rich  and  the  poor  had  widened  ominously  ;  for 
while  the  poor  had  been  driven  to  the  last  extremity, 
their  more  fortunate  fellow-citizens  had  taken  a  mon- 
strously cruel  advantage  of  their  helplessness.  Famine- 
stricken  men  and  women  not  only  cried  to  Nehemiah 
for  the  means  of  getting  corn  for  themselves  and  their 
families ;  they  had  a  complaint  to  make  against  their 
brethren.  Some  had  lost  their  lands  after  mortgaging 
them  to  rich  Jews.  Others  had  even  been  forced  by 
the  money-lenders  to  sell  their  sons  and  daughters  into 
slavery.  They  must  have  been  on  the  brink  of  starva- 
tion before  resorting  to  such  an  unnatural  expedient. 
How  wonderfully,  then,  do  they  exhibit  the  patience  of 
the  poor  in  their  endurance  of  these  agonies  !  There 
v/ere  no  bread-riots.  The  people  simply  appealed  to 
Nehemiah,  who  had  already  proved  himself  their  disin- 
terested friend,  and  who,  as  governor,  was  responsible 
for  the  welfare  of  the  city. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  see  how  it  came  about  that  many 
of  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem  were  in  this  desperate 
plight.  In  all  probability  most  of  Zerubbabel's  and 
Ezra's  pilgrims  had  been  in  humble  circumstances.^ 
It  is  true  successive  expeditions  had  gone  up  with 
contributions  to  the  Jerusalem  colony  ;  but  most  of  the 
stores  they  had  conveyed  had  been  devoted  to  public 
works,  and  even  anything  that  may  have  been  dis- 
tributed among  the  citizens  could  only  have  afforded 
temporary  rehef.  War  utterly  paralyses  industry 
and  commerce.  In  Judaea  the  unsettled  state  of  the 
country  must  have  seriously  impeded  agricultural  and 
pastoral  occupations.  Then  the  importation  of  corn 
into  Jerusalem  would  be  almost  impossible  while  roving 
enemies  were  on  the  watch  in  the  open  country,  so  that 


1 


Neh.  v.]  USURY.  249 


the  price  of  bread  would  rise  as  a  result  of  scarcity. 
At  the  same  time  the  presence  of  persons  from  the 
outlying  towns  would  increase  the  number  of  mouths 
to  be  fed  within  the  city.  Moreover,  the  attention 
given  to  the  building  of  the  walls  and  the  defence 
of  Jerusalem  from  assault  would  prevent  artisans  and 
tradesmen  from  following  the  occupations  by  which 
they  usually  earned  their  living.  Lastly,  the  former 
governors  had  impoverished  the  population  by  exacting 
grievously  heavy  tribute.  The  inevitable  result  of  all 
this  was  debt  and  its  miserable  consequences. 

Just  as  in  the  early  history  of  Athens  and  later  at 
Rome,  the  troubles  to  the  state  arising  from  the  con- 
dition of  the  debtors  were  now  of  the  most  serious 
character.  Nothing  disorganises  society  more  hope- 
lessly than  bad  arrangements  with  respect  to  debts  and 
poverty.  Nehemiah  was  justly  indignant  when  the 
dreadful  truth  was  made  known  to  him.  We  may 
wonder  why  he  had  not  discovered  it  earlier,  since  he 
had  been  going  in  and  out  among  the  people.  Was 
there  a  certain  aloofness  in  his  attitude  ?  His  lonely 
night  ride  suggests  something  of  the  kind.  In  any 
case  his  absorbing  devotion  to  his  one  task  of  rebuild- 
ing the  city  walls  could  have  left  him  little  leisure  for 
other  interests.  The  man  who  is  engaged  in  a  grand 
scheme  for  the  pubHc  good  is  frequently  the  last  to 
notice  individual  cases  of  need.  The  statesman  is  in 
danger  of  ignoring  the  social  condition  of  the  people 
in  the  pursuit  of  political  ends.  It  used  to  be 
the  mistake  of  most  governments  that  their  foreign 
policy  absorbed  their  attention  to  the  neglect  of  home 
interests. 

Nehemiah  was  not  slow  in  recognising  the  public 
need,  when  it  was  brought  under  his  notice  by  the  cry  of 


250  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  'AND  ESTHER. 


the  distressed  debtors.  According  to  the  truly  modern 
custom  of  his  time  in  Jerusalem,  he  called  a  public 
meeting,  explained  the  whole  situation,  and  appealed 
to  the  creditors  to  give  back  the  mortgaged  lands  and 
remit  the  interest  on  their  loans.  This  was  agreed  to 
at  once,  the  popular  conscience  evidently  approving  of 
the  proposal.  Nehemiah,  however,  was  not  content  to 
let  the  matter  rest  here.  He  called  the  priests)  and 
put  them  on  their  oath  to  see  that  the  promise  of  the 
creditors  was  carried  out.  This  appeal  to  the  priest- 
hood is  very  significant.  It  shows  how  rapidly  the 
government  was  tending  towards  a  sacerdotal  theocracy. 
But  it  is  important  to  notice  that  it  was  a  social  and 
not  a  purely  political  matter  in  which  Nehemiah  looked 
to  the  priests.  The  social  order  of  the  Jews  was  more 
especially  bound  up  with  their  religion,  or  rather  with 
their  law  and  its  regulations,  while  as  yet  questions  of 
quasi-foreign  policy  were  freely  relegated  to  the  purely 
civil  authorities,  the  heads  of  famiUes,  the  nobles,  and 
the  supreme  governor  under  the  Persian  administration. 

Nehemiah  followed  the  example  of  the  ancient  prophets 
in  his  symbolical  method  of  denouncing  any  of  the 
creditors  who  would  not  keep  the  promise  he  had  ex- 
tracted from  them.  Shaking  out  his  mantle,  as  though 
to  cast  off  whatever  had  been  wrapped  in  its  folds,  he 
exclaimed,  '*  So  God  shake  out  every  man  from  his  house, 
and  from  his  labour,  that  performeth  not  this  promise,- 
even  thus  be  he  shaken  out,  and  emptied."  *  This  was 
virtually  a  threat  of  confiscation  and  excommunication. 
Yet  the  Ecclesia  gladly  assented,  crying  "  Amen  "  and 
praising  the  Lord. 

The  extreme  position  here   taken  up  by  Nehemiah 

*  Neh.  V,  13. 


Neh.  v.]  USURY.  251 

and  freely  conceded  by  the  people  may  seem  to  us 
unreasonable  unless  we  have  considered  all  the  cir- 
cumstances. Nehemiah  denounced  the  conduct  of  the 
money-lenders  as  morally  wrong.  ''The  thing  that  ye 
do  is  not  good/'  he  said.  It  was  opposed  to  the  will 
of  God.  It  provoked  the  reproach  of  the  heathen.  It 
was  very  different  from  his  own  conduct,  in  redeeming 
captives  and  supporting  the  poor  out  of  his  private 
means.  Now,  wherein  was  the  real  evil  of  the  conduct 
of  these  creditors  ?  The  primitive  law  of  the  '*  Covenant " 
forbad  the  Jews  to  take  interest  for  loans  among  their 
brethren.*  But  why  so  ?  Is  there  not  a  manifest 
convenience  in  the  arrangements  by  which  those  people 
v*^ho  possess  a  superfluity  may  lend  to  those  who  are  tem- 
porarily embarrassed  ?  If  no  interest  is  to  be  paid  for 
such  loans,  is  it  to  be  expected  that  rich  people  will  run 
the  risk  and  put  themselves  to  the  certain  inconvenience 
they  involve  ?  The  man  who  saves  generally  does  so 
in  order  that  his  savings  may  be  of  advantage  to  him. 
If  he  consents  to  defer  the  enjoyment  of  them,  must  not 
this  be  for  some  consideration  ?  In  proportion  as  the 
advantages  of  saving  are  reduced  the  inducements  to 
save  will  be  diminished,  and  then  the  available  lending 
fund  of  the  community  will  be  lessened,  so  that  fewer 
persons  in  need  of  temporary  accommodation  will  be  able 
to  receive  it.  From  another  point  of  view,  may  it  not 
be  urged  that  if  a  man  obtains  the  assistance  of  a  loan 
he  should  be  as  willing  to  pay  for  it  as  he  would  be  to 
pay  for  any  other  distinct  advantage  ?  He  does  not 
get  the  convenience  of  a  coach-ride  for  nothing :  why 
should  he  not  expect  to  pay  anything  for  a  lift  along 
a   difficult   bit    of  his    financial  course  ?      Sometimes 

*  Exod.  xxii.  25. 


252  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


a  loan  may  be  regarded  as  an  act  of  partnership.  The 
tradesman  who  has  not  sufficient  capital  to  carry  on  his 
business  borrows  from  a  neighbour  who  possesses 
money  which  he  desires  to  invest.  Is  not  this  an 
arrangement  in  which  lending  at  interest  is  mutually 
advantageous  ?  In  such  a  case  the  lender  is  really  a 
sort  of  ''  sleeping  partner,"  and  the  interest  he  receives 
is  merely  his  share  in  the  business,  because  it  is  the 
return  which  has  come  back  to  him  through  the  use  of 
his  money.  Where  is  the  wrong  of  such  a  transaction  ? 
Even  when  the  terms  are  more  hard  on  the  debtor, 
may  it  not  be  urged  that  he  does  not  accept  them 
bhndfold  ?  He  knows  what  he  is  doing  when  he  takes 
upon  himself  the  obligations  of  his  debt  and  its  ac- 
companying interest ;  he  willingly  enters  into  the  bond, 
believing  that  it  will  be  for  his  own  advantage.  How 
then  can  he  be  regarded  as  the  victim  of  cruelty  ? 

This  is  one  side  of  the  subject,  and  it  is  not  to  be 
denied  that  it  exhibits  a  considerable  amount  of  truth 
from  its  own  point  of  view.  Even  on  this  ground, 
however,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  advantages  of 
the  debtor  are  as  great  as  they  are  represented.  The 
system  of  carrying  on  business  by  means  of  borrowed 
capital  is  answerable  for  much  of  the  strain  and  anxiety 
of  modern  life,  and  not  a  little  of  the  dishonesty  to 
which  traders  are  now  tempted  w^hen  hard  pressed. 
The  offer  of  " temporary  accommodation"  is  inviting, 
but  it  may  be  questioned  whether  this  is  not  more  often 
than  not  a  curse  to  those  who  accept  it.  Very  fre- 
quently it  only  postpones  the  evil  da3^  Certainly  it  is 
not  found  that  the  multiplication  of  "  pawn-shops " 
tends  to  the  comfort  and  well-being  of  the  people 
among  whom  they  spring  up,  and  possibly,  if  we  could 
look  behind  the  scenes,  we  should  discover  that  lending 


Nch.  v.]  USURY. 


agencies  in  higher  commercial  circles  were  not  much 
more  beneficial  to  the  community. 

Still,  it  may  be  urged,  even  if  the  system  of  borrow- 
ing and  lending  is  often  carried  too  far,  there  are  cases 
in  which  it  is  manifestly  beneficial.  The  borrower  may 
be  really  helped  over  a  temporary  difficulty.  In  a 
time  of  desperate  need  he  may  even  be  saved  from 
starvation.  This  is  not  to  be  denied.  We  must  look 
at  the  system  as  a  whole,  however,  rather  than  only 
at  its  favourable  instances. 

The  strength  of  the  case  for  lending  money  at 
interest  rests  upon  certain  plain  laws  of  ^'  Political 
Economy."  Now  it  is  absurd  to  denounce  the  science 
of  "  Political  Economy  "  as  "  diabolical."  No  science 
can  be  either  good  or  bad,  for  by  its  nature  all  science 
deals  only  with  truth  and  knowledge.  We  do  not  talk 
of  the  morality  of  chemistry.  The  facts  may  be  repre- 
hensible ;  but  the  scientific  co-ordination  of  them,  the 
discovery  of  the  principles  which  govern  them,  cannot 
be  morally  culpable.  Nevertheless  "  Political  Economy  " 
is  only  a  science  on  the  ground  of  certain  pre-supposi- 
tions.  Remove  those  pre-suppositions,  and  the  whole 
fabric  falls  to  the  ground.  It  is  not  then  morally  con- 
demned ;  it  is  simply  inapplicable,  because  its  data 
have  disappeared.  Now  one  of  the  leading  data  of 
this  science  is  the  principle  of  self-interest.  It  is 
assumed  throughout  that  men  are  simply  producing 
and  trading  for  their  own  advantage.  If  this  assump- 
tion is  allowed,  the  laws  and  their  results  follow  with 
the  iron  necessity  of  fate.  But  if  the  self-seeking 
principle  can  be  removed,  and  a  social  principle  be 
made  to  take  its  place,  the  whole  process  will  be 
altered.  We  see  this  happening  with  Nehcmiah,  who  is 
willing  to  lend  free  of  interest.     In  his  case  the  strong 


254       EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


pleas  for  the  reasonableness,  for  the  very  necessity 
of  the  other  system  fall  to  the  ground.  If  the  con- 
tagion of  his  example  were  universal,  we  should  have 
to  alter  our  books  of  ''  Political  Economy,"  and  write 
on  the  subject  from  the  new  standpoint  of  brotherly 
kindness. 

We  have  not  yet  reached  the  bottom  of  this  question. 
It  may  still  be  urged  that,  though  it  was  very  gracious 
of  Nehemiah  to  act  as  he  did,  it  was  not  therefore  culp- 
able in  others  who  failed  to  share  his  views  and  means 
not  to  follow  suit.  In  some  cases  the  lender  might  be 
depending  for  a  livelihood  on  the  produce  of  his  loans. 
If  so,  were  he  to  dechne  to  exact  it,  he  himself  would  be 
absolutely  impoverished.  We  must  meet  this  position 
by  taking  into  account  the  actual  results  of  the  money- 
lending  system  practised  by  the  Jews  in  Jerusalem  in 
the  days  of  Nehemiah.  The  interest  was  high — ''  the 
hundredth  part  of  the  money  "* — i,e.,  with  the  monthly 
payments  usual  in  the  East,  equivalent  to  twelve  per  cent, 
annual  interest.  Then  those  who  could  not  pay  this 
interest,  having  already  pledged  their  estates,  forfeited 
the  property.  A  wise  regulation  of  Deuteronomy — 
unhappily  never  practised — had  required  the  return 
of  mortgaged  land  every  seven  years,  f  This  merciful 
regulation  was  evidently  intended  to  prevent  the  accu- 
mulation of  large  estates  in  the  hands  of  rich  men 
who  would  "  add  field  to  field  "  in  a  way  denounced  by 
the  prophets  with  indignation.  J  Thus  the  tendency 
to  inequality  of  lots  would  be  avoided,  and  temporary 
embarrassment  could  not  lead  to  the  permanent  ruin  of 
a  man  and  his  children  after  him.  It  was  felt,  too,  that 
there  was  a  sacred  character  in  the  land,  which  was  the 

*  Neh.  V.  II.  t  Deut,  xv.  i-6.  %  E.g.,  Isa.  v.  8. 


Neh.  v.]  USURY.  255 


Lord's  possession.  It  was  not  possible  for  a  man  to 
whom  a  portion  had  been  allotted  to  wholly  alienate  it ;  for 
it  was  not  his  to  dispose  of,  it  was  only  his  to  hold.  This 
mystical  thought  would  help  to  maintain  a  sturdy  race 
of  peasants — Naboth,  for  example — who  would  feel 
their  duty  to  their  land  to  be  of  a  religious  nature, 
and  who  would  therefore  be  elevated  and  strengthened 
in  character  by  the  very  possession  of  it.  All  these 
advantages  were  missed  by  the  customs  that  were 
found  to  be  prevalent  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah. 

Far  worse  than  the  alienation  of  their  estates  was  the 
selling  of  their  children  by  the  hard-pressed  creditors. 
An  ancient  law  of  rude  times  recognised  the  fact  and 
regulated  it  in  regard  to  daughters  ;  *  but  it  is  not  easy 
to  see  how  in  an  age  of  civilisation  any  parents  pos- 
sessed of  natural  feeling  could  bring  themselves  to  con- 
sent to  such  a  barbarity.  That  some  did  so  is  a  proof 
of  the  morally  degrading  effect  of  absolute  penury. 
When  the  wolf  is  at  the  door,  the  hungry  man  him- 
self becomes  wolfish.  The  horrible  stories  of  mothers 
in  besieged  cities  boiling  and  eating  their  own  children 
can  only  be  accounted  for  by  some  such  explanation  as 
this.  Here  we  have  the  severest  condemnation  of  the 
social  system  which  permits  of  the  utter  destitution  of 
a  large  portion  of  the  community.  It  is  most  hurtful 
to  the  characters  of  its  victims ;  it  de-humanises  them, 
it  reduces  them  to  the  level  of  beasts. 

Did  Ezra's  stern  reformation  prepare  the  way  for 
this  miserable  condition  of  affairs  ?  He  had  dared  to 
tamper  with  the  most  sacred  domestic  ties.  He  had 
attacked  the  sanctities  of  the  home.  May  we  suppose 
that  one  result  of  his  success  was  to  lower  the  sense 

*  Exod.  xxi.  7. 


256  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

of  home  duties,  and  even  to  stifle  the  deepest  natural 
affections  ?  This  is  at  least  a  melancholy  possibility, 
and  it  warns  us  of  the  danger  of  any  invasion  of  family 
claims  and  duties  by  the  Church  or  the  State. 

Now  it  was  in  face  of  the  terrible  misery  of  the 
Jews  that  Nehemiah  denounced  the  whole  practice  of 
usury  which  was  the  root  of  it.  He  was  not  con- 
templating those  harmless  commercial  transactions  by 
which,  in  our  day,  capital  passes  from  one  hand  to 
another  in  a  way  of  business  that  may  be  equally 
advantageous  to  borrower  and  lender.  All  he  saw  was 
a  state  of  utter  ruin — land  alienated  from  its  old  families, 
boys  and  girls  sold  into  slavery,  and  the  unfortunate 
debtors,  in  spite  of  all  their  sacrifices,  still  on  the  brink 
of  starvation.  In  view  of  such  a  frightful  condition,  he 
naturally  denounced  the  whole  system  that  led  to  it. 
What  else  could  he  have  done  ?  This  was  no  time  for 
a  nice  discrimination  between  the  use  and  the  abuse  of 
the  system.  Nehemiah  saw  nothing  but  abuse  in  it. 
Moreover,  it  was  not  in  accordance  with  the  Hebrew 
way  ever  to  draw  fine  distinctions.  If  a  custom  was 
found  to  be  working  badly,  that  custom  was  reprobated 
entirely ;  no  attempt  was  made  to  save  from  the  wreck 
any  good  elements  that  might  have  been  discovered  in 
it  by  a  cool  scientific  analysis.  In  The  Law,  therefore, 
as  well  as  in  the  particular  cases  dealt  with  by  Nehe- 
miah, lending  at  interest  among  Jews  was  forbidden, 
because  as  usually  practised  it  was  a  cruel,  hurtful 
practice.  Nehemiah  even  refers  to  lending  on  a  pledge, 
without  mentioning  the  interest,  as  an  evil  thing,  be- 
cause it  was  taken  for  granted  that  usury  went  with  it.* 

*  Neh.  V.  7,  lo,  wliere  instead  of  "  usury  "  (A.V.)  we  should  read 
"pledge." 


Neh.  v.]  USURY.  257 


But  that  usury  was  not  thought  to  be  morally  wrong 
in  itself  we  may  learn  from  the  fact  that  Jews  were 
permitted  by  their  law  to  practise  it  with  foreigners,* 
while  they  were  not  allowed  to  do  any  really  wrong 
thing  to  them.  This  distinction  between  the  treatment 
of  the  Jew  and  that  of  the  Gentile  throws  some  light 
on  the  question  of  usury.  It  shows  that  the  real 
ground  of  condemnation  was  that  the  practice  was  con- 
trary to  brotherhood.  Since  then  Christianity  enlarges 
the  field  of  brotherhood,  the  limits  of  exactions  are  pro- 
portionately extended.  There  are  many  things  that  we 
cannot  do  to  a  man  when  we  regard  him  as  a  brother, 
although  we  should  have  had  no  compunction  in  per- 
forming them  before  we  had  owned  the  close  relationship. 
We  see  then  that  what  Nehemiah  and  the  Jewish 
law  really  condemned  was  not  so  much  the  practice  of 
taking  interest  in  the  abstract  as  the  carrying  on  of 
cruel  usury  among  brothers.  The  evil  that  lies  in  that 
also  appears  in  dealings  that  are  not  directly  financial. 
The  world  thinks  of  the  Jew  too  much  as  of  a  Shylock 
who  makes  his  money  breed  by  harsh  exactions 
practised  on  Christians.  But  when  Christians  grow 
rich  by  the  ill-requited  toil  of  their  oppressed  fellow- 
Christians,  when  they  exact  more  than  their  pound  of 
flesh,  when  drop  by  drop  they  squeeze  the  very  life- 
blood  out  of  their  victims,  they  are  guilty  of  the 
abomination  of  usury — in  a  new  form,  but  with  few  of 
its  evils  lightened.  To  take  advantage  of  the  helpless 
condition  of  a  fellow-man  is  exactly  the  wickedness 
denounced  by  Nehemiah  in  the  heartless  rich  men  of 
his  day.  It  is  no  excuse  for  this  that  we  are  within 
our  rights.     It  is  not  always  right  to  insist  upon  our 

*  Deut.  XV.  3-6. 

17 


258  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

rights.  What  is  legally  innocent  may  be  morally 
criminal.  It  is  even  possible  to  get  through  a  court  of 
justice  what  is  nothing  better  than  a  theft  in  the  sight 
of  Heaven.  It  can  never  be  right  to  push  any  one 
down  to  his  ruin. 

But,  it  may  be  said,  the  miserable  man  brought  his 
trouble  upon  himself  by  his  own  recklessness.  Be  it 
so.  Still  he  is  our  brother,  and  we  should  treat  him  as 
such.  We  may  think  we  are  under  no  obhgation  to 
follow  the  example  of  Nehemiah,  who  refused  his  pay 
from  the  impoverished  citizens,  redeemed  Israelites 
from  slavery  in  foreign  lands,  lent  money  free  of  in- 
terest, and  entertained  a  number  of  Jews  at  his  table 
— all  out  of  the  savings  of  his  old  courtier  days  at 
Susa.  And  yet  a  true  Christian  cannot  escape  from 
the  belief  that  there  is  a  real  obligation  lying  on  him 
to  imitate  this  royal  bounty  as  far  as  his  means  permit. 

The  law  in  Deuteronomy  commanded  the  Israelite 
to  lend  willingly  to  the  needy,  and  not  harden  his  heart 
or  shut  up  his  hands  from  his  ^'  poor  brother."  *  Our 
Lord  goes  further,  for  He  distinctly  requires  His 
disciples  to  lend  when  they  do  not  expect  that  the  loan 
will  ever  be  returned — ''  If  ye  lend  to  them  of  whom  ye 
hope  to  receive,"  He  asks,  '^  what  thanks  have  ye  ?  even 
sinners  lend  to  sinners,  to  receive  again  as  much."! 
And  St.  Paul  is  thinking  of  no  work  of  supererogation 
when  he  writes,  ''  Bear  ye  one  another's  burdens,  and 
so  fulfil  the  law  of  Christ."  %  Yet  if  somebody  suggests 
that  these  precepts  should  be  taken  seriously  and  put 
in  practice  to-day,  he  is  shouted  down  as  a  fanatic. 
Why  is  this  ?  Will  Christ  be  satisfied  with  less  than 
His  own  requirements  ? 


Deut.  XV.  7,  8.  f  Luke  vi.  34.  %  Gal.  vi.  2, 


CHAPTER   XXIII. 

JVISE  AS  SERPENTS. 
NehemIxh  vk 

OPEN  opposition  had  totally  failed.  The  watchful 
garrison  had  not  once  permitted  a  surprise.  In 
spite  of  the  persistent  malignity  of  his  enemies, 
Nehemiah  had  raised  the  walls  all  round  the  city  till 
not  a  breach  remained  anywhere.  The  doors  had  yet 
to  be  hung  at  the  great  gateways,  but  the  fortification 
of  Jerusalem  had  proceeded  so  far  that  it  was  hopeless 
for  the  enemy  to  attempt  any  longer  to  hinder  it  by 
violence.  Accordingly  the  leading  antagonists  changed 
their  tactics.  They  turned  from  force  to  fraud — a 
method  of  strategy  which  was  a  confession  of  weak- 
ness. The  antagonism  to  the  Jews  was  now  in  a  very 
different  position  from  that  which  it  had  attained  before 
Nehemiah  had  appeared  on  the  scene,  and  when  all 
Syria  was  moved  and  Artaxerxes  himself  won  over 
to  the  Samaritan  view.  It  had  no  support  from  the 
Satrap.  It  was  directly  against  the  policy  sanctioned 
by  the  king.  In  its  impotence  it  was  driven  to  adopt 
humihating  devices  of  cunning  and  deceit ;  and  even 
these  expedients  proved  to  be  ineffectual.  It  has  been 
well  remarked  that  the  rustic  tricksters  from  Samaria 
were  no  match  for  a  trained  courtier.     Nehemiah  easily 


26o  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


detected  the  clumsy  snares  that  were  set  to  entrap  him. 
Thus  he  illustrates  that  wisdom  of  the  serpent  which 
our  Lord  commends  to  His  disciples  as  a  useful  weapon 
for  meeting  the  temptations  and  dangers  they  must  be 
prepared  to  encounter.  The  serpent,  repulsive  and 
noxious,  the  common  symbol  of  sin,  to  some  the  very 
incarnation  of  the  devil,  was  credited  with  a  quality 
worthy  of  imitation  by  One  who  could  see  the  ''  soul  of 
goodness  in  things  evil."  The  subtlety  of  the  keen- 
eyed,  sinuous  beast  appeared  to  Him  in  the  light  of  a 
real  excellence,  which  should  be  rescued  from  its  de- 
gradation in  the  crawling  reptile  and  set  to  a  worthy 
use.  He  rejoiced  yi  the  revelation  made  to  babes  ; 
but  it  would  be  an  insult  to  the  children  whom  He  set 
before  us  as  the  typical  members  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  to  mistake  this  for  a  benediction  of  stupidity. 
The  fact  is,  dulness  is  often  nothing  but  the  result 
of  indolence  ;  it  often  comes  from  negligence  in  the 
cultivation  of  faculties  God  has  given  to  men  more 
generously  than  they  will  acknowledge.  Surely,  true 
religion,  since  it  consists  in  a  Divine  life,  must  bring 
vitality  to  the  whole  man,  and  thus  quicken  the  intellect 
as  well  as  the  heart.  St.  James  refers  to  the  highest 
wisdom  as  a  gift  which  God  bestows  liberally  and 
without  upbraiding  on  those  who  ask  for  it.*  Our 
plain  dut}',  therefore,  is  not  to  permit  ourselves  to  be 
befooled  to  our  ruin. 

But  when  we  compare  the  wisdom  of  Nehemiah  with 
the  cunning  of  his  enemies  we  notice  a  broad  distinction 
between  the  two  qualities.  Sanballat  and  his  fellow- 
conspirator,  the  Arab  Geshem,  condescend  to  the  m.ean- 
ness  of  deceit :  they  try  to  allure  their  victim  into  their 


James  i.  5. 


Neh.  vi.]  WISE  AS  SERPENTS.  261 


power;  they  invite  him  to  trust  himself  to  their 
hospitahty  while  intending  to  reward  his  confidence 
with  treachery ;  they  concoct  false  reports  to  blacken 
the  reputation  of  the  man  whom  they  dare  not  openly 
attack  ;  with  diabolical  craft  one  of  their  agents  en- 
deavours to  tempt  Nehemiah  to  an  act  of  cowardice  that 
would  involve  apparently  a  culpable  breach  of  religious 
propriety,  in  order  that  his  influence  may  be  undermined 
by  the  destruction  of  his  reputation.  From  beginning 
to  end  this  is  all  a  policy  of  lies.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  is  not  a  shadow  of  insincerity  in  Nehemiah's 
method  of  frustrating  it.  He  uses  his  keen  intelligence 
in  discovering  the  plots  of  his  foes  ;  he  never  degrades 
it  by  weaving  counterplots.  In  the  game  of  diplomacy 
he  outwits  his  opponents  at  every  stage.  If  he  would 
lend  himself  to  their  mendacious  methods,  he  might 
turn  them  round  his  finger.  But  he  will  do  nothing 
of  the  kind.  One  after  another  he  breaks  up  the 
petty  schemes  of  the  dishonest  men  who  continue 
to  worry  him  with  their  devices,  and  quietly  hands 
them  back  the  fragments,  to  their  bitter  chagrin. 
His  replies  are  perfectly  frank;  his  policy  is  clear 
as  the  day.  Wise  as  the  serpent,  he  is  harmless 
as  the  dove.  A  man  of  astounding  discernment,  he 
is  nevertheless  "an  Israelite  indeed,  in  whom  there 
is   no  guile." 

The  first  proposal  had  danger  written  on  the  face  of 
it,  and  the  persistence  with  which  so  lame  a  device  was 
repeated  does  not  do  much  credit  to  the  ingenuity  of 
the  conspirators.  Their  very  malignity  seems  to  have 
blinded  them  to  the  fact  that  they  were  not  deceiving 
Nehemiah.  Perhaps  they  thought  that  he  would  yield 
to  sheer  importunity.  Their  suggestion  was  that  he 
should  come  out  of  Jerusalem  and  confer  with  Sanballat 


262  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

and  his  friends  some  miles  away  in  the  plain  of  Sharon.* 
The  Jews  were  known  to  be  hard-pressed,  weary,  and 
famine-stricken,  and  any  overtures  that  promised  an 
amicable  settlement,  or  even  a  temporary  truce,  might 
be  viewed  acceptably  by  the  anxious  governor  on 
whose  sole  care  the  social  troubles  of  the  citizens  as 
well  as  the  military  protection  of  the  city  depended. 
Very  likely  information  gleaned  from  spies  within 
Jerusalem  guided  the  conspirators  in  choosing  the 
opportunities  for  their  successive  overtures.  These 
would  seem  most  timely  when  the  social  troubles  of  the 
Jews  were  most  serious.  In  another  way  the  invitation 
to  a  parley  might  be  thought  attractive  to  Nehemiah. 
It  would  appeal  to  his  nobler  feelings.  A  generous 
man  is  unv/illing  to  suspect  the  dishonesty  of  his 
neighbours. 

But  Nehemiah  was  not  caught  by  the  "  confidence 
trick."  He  knew  the  conspirators  intended  to  do  him 
mischief  Yet  as  this  intention  was  not  actually  proved 
against  them,  he  put  no  accusation  into  his  reply.  The 
inference  from  it  was  clear  enough.  But  the  message 
itself  could  not  be  construed  into  any  indication  of 
discourtesy.  Nehemiah  was  doing  a  great  work. 
Therefore  he  could  not  come  down.  This  was  a 
perfectly  genuine  answer.  For  the  governor  to  have 
left  Jerusalem  at  the  present  crisis  would  have  been 
disastrous  to  the  city.  The  conspirators  then  tried 
another  plan  for  getting  Nehemiah  to  meet  them  out- 
side Jerusalem.  They  pretended  that  it  was  reported 
that  his  work  in  fortifying  the  city  was  carried  on  with 

*  At  Ono.  This  place  has  not  3'et  been  found.  It  cannot  well  be 
Beit  Unia,  north-west  of  Jerusalem,  near  Beitin  (Bethel).  Its 
association  with  Lod  (Lydda)  in  I  Chron.  viii,  12  and  Neh.  xi.  35, 
points  to  the  neighbourhood  of  the  latter  place. 


Neh.  vi.]  If^ISE  AS  SERPENTS.  263 


the  object  of  rebelling  against  the  Persian  government, 
and  that  this  report  had  gone  so  far  as  to  convey  the 
impression  that  he  had  induced  prophets  to  preach  his 
kingship.  Some  such  suspicion  had  been  hinted  at 
before,  at  the  time  of  Nehemiah's  coming  up  to 
Jerusalem,*  but  then  its  own  absurdity  had  prevented 
it  from  taking  root.  Now  the  actual  appearance  of 
the  walls  round  the  once  ruinous  city,  and  the  rising 
reputation  of  Nehem.iah  as  a  man  of  resource  and 
energy,  might  give  some  colour  to  the  calumny.  The 
point  of  the  conspirators'  device,  however,  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  actual  spreading  of  the  dangerous  rumour, 
but  in  the  alarm  to  be  suggested  to  Nehemiah  by  the 
thought  that  it  was  being  spread.  Nehemiah  would 
know  very  w^ell  how  much  mischief  is  wrought  by  idle 
and  quite  groundless  talk.  The  libel  may  be  totally 
false,  and  yet  it  may  be  impossible  for  its  victim  to 
follow  it  up  and  clear  his  character  in  every  nook  and 
cranny  to  which  it  penetrates.  A  lie,  like  a  weed,  if^ 
it  is  not  nipped  in  the  bud,  sheds  seeds  which  every 
wind  of  gossip  will  spread  far  and  wide,  so  that  it  soon 
becomes  impossible  to  stamp  it  out.  -  -^ 

In  their  effort  to  frighten  Nehemiah  the  conspirators 
suggested  that  the  rumour  would  reach  the  king. 
They  as  much  as  hinted  that  they  would  undertake 
the  business  of  reporting  it  themselves  if  he  would  not 
come  to  terms  with  them.  This  was  an  attempt  at 
extracting  blackmail.  Having  failed  in  their  appeal  to 
his  generous  instincts,  the  conspirators  tried  to  work 
on  his  fears.  For  any  one  of  less  heroic  mind  than 
Nehemiah  their  diabolical  threat  would  have  been 
overwhelmingly  powerful.     Even  he  could  not  but  feel 


*  Neh,  ii.  19. 


264  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

the' force  of  it.  It  calls  to  mind  the  last  word  of  the 
Jews  that  determined  Pilate  to  surrender  Jesus  to  the 
death  he  knew  was  not  merited  :  "  If  thou  let  this  Man 
go,  thou  art  not  Caesar's  friend."  The  suspicion  that 
always  haunts  the  mind  of  an  autocratic  sovereign  gives 
undue  weight  to  any  charges  of  treason.  Artaxerxes 
was  not  a  Tiberius.  But  the  good-natured  monarch 
was  liable  to  persuasion.  Nehemiah  must  have  had 
occasion  to  witness  many  instances  of  the  fatal  conse- 
quences of  royal  displeasure.  Could  he  rely  on  the 
continuance  of  his  master's  favour  nov/  he  was  far  from 
the  court,  while  lying  tongues  were  trying  to  poison  the 
ears  of  the  king  ?  Before  first  speaking  of  his  project 
for  helping  his  people,  he  had  trembled  at  the  risk  he 
was  about  to  incur ;  how  then  could  he  now  learn 
with  equanimity  that  a  cruelly  mendacious  repre- 
sentation of  it  was  being  made  to  Artaxerxes  ?  His 
sense  of  the  gravity  of  the  situation  is  seen  in  the  way 
in  which  he  met  it.  Nehemiah  indignantly  repudiated 
the  charge.  He  boldly  asserted  that  it  had  been 
invented  by  the  conspirators.  To  them  he  showed 
an  unwavering  front.  But  we  are  able  to  look  behind 
the  scenes.  It  is  one  advantage  of  this  autobiographical 
sketch  of  Nehemiah's  that  in  it  the  v/riter  repeatedly 
lifts  the  veil  and  reveals  to  us  the  secret  of  his 
thoughts.  Heroic  in  the  world,  before  men,  he  still 
knew  his  real  human  weakness.  But  he  knew  too 
that  his  strength  was  in  God.  Such  heroism  as  his  is 
not  like  the  stolidity  of  the  hfeless  rock.  It  resembles 
the  strength  of  the  living  oak,  which  grows  more 
massive  just  in  proportion  as  it  is  supplied  with  fresh 
sap.  According  to  his  custom  in  every  critical  moment 
of  his  life,  Nehemiah  resorted  to  prayer,  and  thus  again 
we  come  upon  one  of  those  brief  ejaculations  uttered  in 


Neh.  vi.J  JV/SE  AS  SERPENTS.  265 

the  midst  of  the  stress  and  strain  of  a  busy  life  that 
light  up  the  pages  of  his  narrative  from  time  to  time. 
The  point  of  his  prayer  is  simple  and  definite.  It  is 
just  that  his  hands  may  be  strengthened.  This  would 
have  a  twofold  bearing.  In  the  first  place,  it  would 
certainly  seek  a  revival  of  inward  energy.  Nehemiah 
waits  on  the  Lord  that  He  may  renew  his  strength. 
He  knows  that  God  helps  him  through  his  ov/n 
exercise  of  energy,  so  that  if  he  is  to  be  protected  he 
must  be  made  strong.  But  the  prayer  means  more 
than  this.  For  the  hands  to  be  strengthened  is  for 
their  work  to  prosper.  Nehemiah  craves  the  aid  of 
God  that  all  may  go  right  in  spite  of  the  terrible  danger 
from  lying  calumnies  with  which  he  is  confronted  ; 
and  his  prayer  was  answered.  The  second  device  was 
frustrated. 

The  third  was  managed  very  differently.  This 
time  Nehemiah  was  attacked  within  the  city,  for  it  was 
now  apparent  that  no  attempts  to  lure  him  outside  the 
walls  could  succeed.  A  curious  characteristic  of  the 
new  incident  is  that  Nehemiah  himself  paid  a  visit  to 
the  man  who  was  the  treacherous  instrument  of  his 
enemies'  devices.  He  vvent  in  person  to  the  house  of 
Shemaiah  the  prophet — a  most  mysterious  proceeding. 
We  have  no  explanation  of  his  reason  for  going.  Had 
the  prophet  sent  for  Nehemiah  ?  or  is  it  possible 
that  in  the  dread  perplexity  of  the  crisis,  amid  the 
snares  that  surrounded  him,  oppressed  with  the  loneli- 
ness of  his  position  of  supreme  responsibility,  Nehemiah 
hungered  for  a  Divine  message  from  an  inspired  oracle? 
It  is  plain  from  this  chapter  that  the  common,  every- 
day prophets — so  much  below  the  great  messengers  of 
Jehovah  whose  writings  represent  Hebrew  prophecy  to 
us   to-day — had  survived   the  captivity,  and  were   still 


266  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

practising  divination  much  after  the  manner  of  heathen 
soothsayers,  as  their  fathers  had  done  before  them 
from  the  time  when  a  young  farmer's  son  was  sent  to 
Samuel  to  learn  the  whereabouts  of  a  lost  team  of 
asses.  If  Nehemiah  had  resorted  to  the  prophet  of 
his  own  accord,  his  danger  was  indeed  serious.  In  this 
case  it  would  be  the  more  to  his  credit  that  he  did  not 
permit  himself  to  be  duped. 

Another  feature  of  the  strange  incident  is  not  very 
clear  to  us.  Nehemiah  tells  us  that  the  prophet  was 
^'  shut  up."  *  What  does  this  mean  ?  Was  the  man 
ceremonially  unclean  ?  or  ill  ?  or  in  custody  under  some 
accusation  ?  None  of  these  three  explanations  can  be 
accepted,  because  Shemaiah  proposed  to  proceed  at  once 
to  the  temple  with  Nehemiah,  and  thus  confessed  his 
seclusion  to  be  voluntary.  Can  we  give  a  metaphorical 
interpretation  to  the  expression,  and  understand  the 
prophet  to  be  representing  himself  as  under  a  Divine 
compulsion,  the  thought  of  which  may  give  the  more 
urgency  to  the  advice  he  tenders  to  Nehemiah  ?  In 
this  case  we  should  look  for  a  more  explicit  statement, 
for  the  whole  force  of  his  message  would  depend  upon 
the  authority  thus  attributed  to  it.  A  simpler  inter- 
pretation, to  which  the  language  of  Shemaiah  points, 
and  one  in  accordance  with  all  the  wretched,  scheming 
policy  of  the  enemies  of  Nehemiah,  is  that  the  prophet 
pretended  that  he  was  himself  in  personal  danger  as  a 
friend  and  supporter  of  the  governor,  and  that  therefore 
he  found  it  necessary  to  keep  himself  in  seclusion. 
Thus  by  his  own  attitude  he  would  try  to  work  on  the 
fears  of  Nehemiah. 

The  proposal  that    the   prophet  should    accompany 

*  Neh.  vi.  lo. 


Nch.  vi.]  IVISE  AS  SERPENTS.  267 


Nehemiah  to  the  shelter  of  the  temple,  even  into  the 
"  Holy  Place,"  was  temptingly  plausible.  The  heathen 
regarded  the  shrines  of  their  gods  as  sanctuaries,  and 
similar  notions  seem  to  have  attached  themselves  to  the 
Jewish  altar.  Moreover,  the  massive  structure  of  the 
temple  was  itself  a  defence — the  temple  of  Herod  was 
the  last  fortress  to  be  taken  in  the  great  final  siege. 
In  the  temple,  too,  Nehemiah  might  hope  to  be  safe 
from  the  surprise  of  a  street  c'meute  among  the  dis- 
affected sections  of  the  population.  Above  all,  the 
presence  and  counsel  of  a  prophet  would  seem  to 
sanction  and  authorise  the  course  indicated.  Yet  it 
was  all  a  cruel  snare.  This  time  the  purpose  was  to 
discredit  Nehemiah  in  the  eyes  of  the  Jews,  inasmuch 
as  his  influence  depended  largely  on  his  reputation. 
But  again  Nehemiah  could  see  through  the  tricks  of 
his  enemies.  He  was  neither  blinded  by  self-interest 
nor  overawed  by  prophetic  authority.  The  use  of  that 
authority  was  the  last  arrow  in  the  quiver  of  his  foes. 
They  would  attack  him  through  his  religious  faith. 
Their  mistake  was  that  the}^  took  too  low  a  view  of  that 
faith.  This  is  the  common  mistake  of  the  irreligious  in 
their  treatment  of  truly  devout  men.  Nehemiah  knew 
that  a  prophet  could  err.  Had  there  not  been  lying 
prophets  in  the  days  of  Jeremiah  ?  It  is  a  proof  of  his 
true  spiritual  insight  that  he  could  discern  one  in  his 
pretended  protector.  The  test  is  clear  to  a  man  with 
so  true  a  conscience  as  we  see  in  Nehemiah.  If  the 
prophet  says  what  we  know  to  be  morally  wrong,  he 
cannot  be  speaking  from  God.  It  is  not  the  teaching 
of  the  Bible — not  the  teaching  of  the  Old  Testament  any 
more  than  that  of  the  New — that  revelation  supersedes 
conscience,  that  we  are  ever  to  take  on  authority  what 
our  moral  nature  abhors.     The  humility  that  would  lay 


268  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

conscience  under  the  heel  of  authority  is  false  and 
degrading,  and  it  is  utterly  contrary  to  the  whole  tenor 
of  Scripture.  One  great  sign  of  the  worth  of  a  prophecy 
is  its  character.  Thus  the  devout  man  is  to  try  the 
spirits,  whether  they  be  of  God.*  Nehemiah  has  the 
clear,  serene  conscience  that  detects  sin  when  it  appears 
in  the  guise  of  sanctity.  He  sees  at  a  glance  that  it 
would  be  wrong  for  him  to  follow  Shemaiah's  advice. 
It  would  involve  a  cowardly  desertion  of  his  post.  It 
would  also  involve  a  desecration  of  the  sacred  temple 
enclosure.  How  could  he,  being  such  as  he  was — i.e., 
a  layman — go  into  the  temple,  even  to  save  his  life  ?  t 
But  did  not  our  Lord  excuse  David  for  an  analogous 
action  in  eating  the  shewbread?  True.  But  Nehemiah 
did  not  enjoy  the  primitive  freedom  of  David,  nor  the 
later  enlightened  liberty  of  Christ.  In  his  intermediate 
position,  in  his  age  of  nascent  ceremonialism,  it  was 
impossible  for  him  to  see  that  simple  human  necessities 
could  ever  override  the  claims  of  ritual.  His  duty  was 
shaped  to  him  by  his  beliefs.  So  is  it  with  every 
man.    To  him  that  esteemeth  anything  sin  it  is  sin.  % 

Nehemiah's  answer  to  the  proposal  of  the  wily  prophet 
is  very  blunt — '*  I  will  not  go  in."  Bluntness  is  the 
best  reply  to  sophistry.  The  whole  scheme  was  open 
to  Nehemiah.  He  perceived  that  God  had  not  sent  the 
prophet,  that  this  man  was  but  a  tool  in  the  hands  of 
the  Samaritan  conspirators.  In  solemnly  committing 
the  leaders  of  the  vile  conspiracy  to  the  judgment  of 
Heaven,  Nehemiah  includes  a  prophetess,  Noadiah — 
degenerate  successor  of  the  patriotic  Deborah  ! — and  the 
whole  gang  of  corrupt,  traitorous  prophets.  Thus  the 
wrongness  of  Shemaiah's  proposal  not  only  discredited 

*   I  John  iv.  I.  f  Neh.  vi.  ii.  :j:  Rom.  xiv.  14. 


Neh.  VI.]  WISE  AS  SERPENTS.  269 


his  mission  ;  it  also  revealed  the  secret  of  his  whole 
undertaking  and  that  of  his  unworthy  coadjutors. 
While  Nehemiah  detected  the  character  of  the  false 
prophecy  by  means  of  his  clear  perceptions  of  right  and 
wrong,  those  perceptions  helped  him  to  discover  the 
hidden  hand  of  his  foe.  He  was  not  to  be  sheltered  in 
the  temple,  as  Shemaiah  suggested ;  but  he  was  saved 
through  the  keenness  of  his  own  conscience.  In  this 
case  the  wisdom  of  the  serpent  in  him  was  the  direct 
outcome  of  his  high  moral  nature  and  the  care  with 
which  he  kept  "  conscience  as  the  noontide  clear." 

Nehemiah  adds  two  items  by  way  of  postscripts  to  his 
account  of  the  building  of  the  walls. 

The  first  is  the  completion  of  the  work,  with  its  effect 
on  the  jealous  enemies  of  the  Jews.  It  was  finished 
in  fifty-two  days — an  almost  incredibly  short  time, 
especially  when  the  hindrances  of  internal  troubles  and 
external  attacks  are  taken  into  account.  The  building 
must  have  been  hasty  and  rough.  Still  it  was  sufficient 
for  its  purpose.  The  moral  effect  of  it  was  the  chief 
result  gained.  The  sense  of  discouragement  now 
passed  over  to  the  enemy.  It  was  the  natural  reaction 
from  the  mockery  with  which  they  had  assailed  the 
commencement  of  the  work,  that  at  the  sight  of  the 
completion  of  it  they  should  be  *'  much  cast  down."  * 
We  can  imagine  the  grim  satisfaction  with  which 
Nehemiah  would  write  these  words.  But  they  tell  of 
more  than  the  humiliation  of  insulting  and  deceitful 
enemies ;  they  complete  an  act  in  a  great  drama  of  Pro- 
vidence, in  which  the  courage  that  stands  to  duty  in 
face  of  all  danger  and  the  faith  that  looks  to  God  in 
prayer  are  vindicated. 

*  Neh.  vi.  16. 


270  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

The  second  postscript  describes  yet  another  source  of 
danger  to  Nehemiah — one  possibly  remaining  after  the 
walls  were  up.  Tobiah,  ''  the  servant,"  had  not  been 
included  in  the  previous  conspiracies.  But  he  was 
playing  a  little  game  of  his  own.  The  intermarriage 
of  leading  Jewish  families  with  foreigners  was  bearing 
dangerous  fruit  in  his  case.  Tobiah  had  married  a 
Jewess,  and  his  son  had  followed  his  example.  In 
each  case  the  alliance  had  brought  him  into  connection 
with  a  well-known  family  in  Jerusalem.  These  two 
families  pleaded  his  merits  with  Nehemiah,  and  at  the 
same  time  acted  as  spies  and  reported  the  words  of  the 
governor  to  Tobiah.  The  consequence  was  the  receipt 
of  alarmist  letters  from  this  man  by  Nehemiah.  The 
worst  danger  might  thus  be  found  among  the  dis- 
affected citizens  within  the  walls  who  were  irritated  at 
the  rigorously  exclusive  policy  of  Ezra,  which  Nehemiah 
had  not  discouraged,  although  he  had  not  yet  had  oc- 
casion to  push  it  further.  The  stoutest  walls  will  not 
protect  from  treason  within  the  ramparts.  So  after  all 
the  labour  of  completing  the  fortifications  Nehemiah's 
trust  must  still' be  in  God  alone. 


CHAPTER   XXIV. 

THE  LAW. 
Nehemiah  viij.  1-8, 

THE  fragmentary  nature  of  the  chronicler's  work  is 
nowhere  more  apparent  than  in  that  portion  of 
it  which  treats  of  the  events  immediately  following  on 
the  completion  of  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem.  In 
Nehemiah  vii,  we  have  a  continuation  of  the  governor's 
personal  narrative  of  his  work,  describing  how  the 
watch  was  organised  after  the  walls  had  been  built  and 
the  gates  set  up.*  This  is  followed  by  a  remark  on 
the  sparseness  of  the  city  population,!  which  leads 
Nehemiah  to  insert  the  list  of  Zerubbabel's  pilgrims 
that  the  chronicler  subsequently  copies  out  in  his 
account  of  Zerubbabel's  expedition.  J  Here  the  subject 
is  dropped,  to  be  resumed  at  Nehemiah  xi.,  where  the 
arrangements  for  increasing  the  population  of  Jerusalem 
are  described.  Thus  we  might  read  right  on  with  a 
continuous  narrative — allowing  for  the  insertion  of  the 
genealogical  record,  the  reason  for  which  is  obvious — 
and  omit  the  three  intermediate  chapters  without  any 
perceptible  hiatus,  but,  on  the  contrary,  with  a  gain  in 
consecutiveness. 

These  three  chapters  stand  by  themselves,  and  they 


*  Neh.  vii.  1-3.  f  Neh.  vii.  4.  J  Neh.  vii.  5-73  =  Ezra  ii, 

271 


272  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

are  devoted  to  another  matter,  and  that  a  matter  marked 
by  a  certain  unity  and  distinctive  character  of  its  own. 
They  are  written  in  the  third  person,  by  the  chronicler 
himself.  In  them  Ezra  suddenly  reappears  without  any 
introduction,  taking  the  leading  place,  while  Nehemiah 
recedes  into  the  background,  only  to  be  mentioned  once 
or  twice,  and  then  as  the  loyal  supporter  of  the  famous 
scribe.  The  style  has  a  striking  resemblance  to  that 
of  Ezra,  from  whom  therefore,  it  has  been  conjectured, 
the  chronicler  may  here  have  derived  his  materials. 

These  facts,  and  minor  points  that  seem  to  support 
them,  have  raised  the  question  whether  the  section 
Nehemiah  viii. — x.  is  found  in  its  right  place  ;  whether 
it  should  not  have  been  joined  on  to  the  Book  of  Ezra 
as  a  description  of  what  followed  immediately  after  the 
events  there  recorded  and  before  the  advent  of  Nehemiah 
to  Jerusalem.  Ezra  brought  the  book  of  The  Law  with 
him  from  Babylon.  It  would  be  most  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  he  would  seize  the  first  opportunity  for 
making  it  known.  Accordingly  we  find  that  the  cor- 
responding section  in  I  Esdras  is  in  this  position.* 
Nevertheless  it  is  now  generally  agreed  that  the  three 
chapters  as  they  stand  in  the  Book  of  Nehemiah  are  in 
their  true  chronological  position.  Tw4ce  Nehemiah  him- 
self appears  in  the  course  of  the  narrative  they  contain. 
He  is  associated  with  Ezra  and  the  Levites  in  teaching 
The  Law,t  and  his  name  stands  first  in  the  list  of  the 
covenanters.  J  The  admission  of  these  facts  is  only 
avoided  in  i  Esdras  by  an  alteration  of  the  text.  If 
we  were  to  suppose  that  the  existence  of  the  name  in 
our  narrative  is  the  result  of  an  interpolation  by  a  later 
hand,  it  would  be  difficult  to  account  for  this,  and  it 

*  I  Esdras  ix.  37-55.  f  Neh.  viii.  9.  \  Neh.  x.  I. 


Nch.  viii.  1-8.]  THE  LA  IV.  273 

would  be  still  more  difficult  to  discover  why  the 
chronicler  should  introduce  confusion  into  his  narrative 
by  an  aimless  misplacement  of  it.  His  methods  of 
procedure  are  sometimes  curious,  it  must  be  admitted, 
and  that  we  met  with  a  misplaced  section  in  an  earlier 
chapter  cannot  be  reasonably  questioned.*  But  the 
motive  which  probably  prompted  that  peculiar  arrange- 
ment does  not  apply  here.  In  the  present  case  it  would 
result  in  nothing  but  confusion. 

The  question  is  of  far  more  than  literary  interest. 
The  time  when  The  Law  was  first  made  known  to  the 
people  in  its  entirety  is  a  landmark  of  the  first  import- 
ance for  the  History  of  Israel.  There  is  a  profound 
significance  in  the  fact  that  though  Ezra  had  long  been 
a  diligent  student  and  a  careful,  loving  scribe,  though 
he  had  carried  up  the  precious  roll  to  Jerusalem,  and 
though  he  had  been  in  great  power  and  influence  in  the 
city,  he  had  not  found  a  fitting  opportunity  for  reveal- 
ing his  secret  to  his  people  before  all  his  reforming 
efforts  v/ere  arrested,  and  the  city  and  its  inhabitants 
trampled  under  foot  by  their  envious  neighbours. 
Then  came  Nehemiah's  reconstruction.  Still  the  con- 
sideration of  The  Law  remained  in  abeyance.  While 
Jerusalem  was  an  armed  camp,  and  while  the  citizens 
were  toiling  at  the  walls  or  mounting  guard  by  turn, 
there  was  no  opportunity  for  a  careful  attention  to  the 
sacred  document.  All  this  time  Ezra  was  out  of  sight, 
and  his  name  not  once  mentioned.  Yet  he  was  far  too 
brilliant  a  star  to  have  been  eclipsed  even  by  the  rising 
of  Nehemiah.  We  can  only  account  for  the  sudden 
and  absolute  vanishing  of  the  greatest  figure  of  the 
age  by  supposing  that  he  had  retired  from  the  scene, 

*  Ezra  iv.  7-23. 

18 


^74       EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

perhaps  gone  back  to  Babylon  alone  with  his  grief  and 
disappointment.  Those  were  not  days  for  the  scholar  s 
mission.  But  now,  with  the  return  of  some  amount  of 
security  and  its  accompanying  leisure,  Ezra  emerges 
again,  and  immediately  he  is  accorded  the  front  place 
and  Nehemiah — the  "  Saviour  of  Society  " — modestly 
assumes  the  attitude  of  his  disciple.  A  higher  tribute 
to  the  exalted  position  tacitly  allowed  to  the  scribe  or 
a  finer  proof  of  the  unselfish  humility  of  the  young 
statesman  cannot  be  imagined.  Though  at  the  height 
of  his  power,  having  frustrated  the  many  evil  designs 
of  his  enemies  and  completed  his  stupendous  task  of 
fortifying  the  city  of  his  fathers  in  spite  of  the  most 
vexatious  difficulties,  the  successful  patriot  is  not  in 
the  least  degree  flushed  with  victory.  In  the  quietest 
manner  possible  he  steps  aside  and  yields  the  first 
place  to  the  recluse,  the  student,  the  writer,  the  teacher. 
This  is  a  sign  of  the  importance  that  ideas  will  assume 
in  the  new  age.  The  man  of  action  gives  place  to  the 
man  of  thought.  Still  more  is  it  a  hint  of  the  coming 
ecclesiasticism  of  the  new  Jewish  order.  As  the  civil 
ruler  thus  takes  a  lower  ground  in  the  presence  of  the 
religious  leader,  we  seem  to  be  anticipating  those  days 
of  the  triumph  of  the  Church  when  a  king  would 
stand  like  a  groom  to  hold  the  horse  of  a  pope.  And 
yet  this  is  not  officially  arranged.  It  is  not  formally 
conceded  on  the  one  side,  nor  is  it  formally  demanded 
on  the  other  side.  The  situation  may  be  rather  com- 
pared with  that  of  Savonarola  in  Florence  when  by 
sheer  moral  force  he  overtopped  the  power  of  the 
Medici,  or  that  of  Calvin  at  Geneva  when  the  municipal 
council  willingly  yielded  to  the  commanding  spirit  of 
the  minister  of  reHgion  because  it  recognised  the 
supremacy  of  religion. 


Neh.  viii.  1-S.]  THE  LAW.  275 


In  such  a  condition  of  affairs  the  city  was  ripe  for 
the  public  exposition  of  The  Law.  But  even  then 
Ezra  only  published  it  after  having  been  requested  to 
do  so  by  the  people.  We  cannot  assign  this  delay 
of  his  to  any  reluctance  to  let  his  fellow-countrymen 
know  the  law  which  he  had  long  loved  and  studied  in 
private.  We  may  rather  conclude  that  he  perceived  the 
utter  inutihty  of  any  attempt  to  thrust  it  upon  inatten- 
tive hearers — nay,  the  positive  mischievousnessof  such 
a  proceeding.  This  would  approach  the  folly  described 
by  our  Lord  when  He  warned  His  disciples  against 
casting  pearls  before  swine.  Very  much  of  the  popular 
indifference  to  the  Bible  among  large  sections  of  the 
population  to-day  must  be  laid  at  the  doors  of  those 
unwise  zealots  who  have  dinned  the  mere  letter  of  it 
into  the  ears  of  unwilling  auditors.  The  conduct  of 
Ezra  shows  that,  with  all  his  reverence  for  The  Law, 
the  Great  Scribe  did  not  consider  that  it  was  to  be 
imposed,  like  a  civil  code,  by  magisterial  authority. 
The  decree  of  Artaxerxes  had  authorised  him  to  enforce 
it  in  this  way  on  every  Jew  west  of  the  Euphrates.* 
But  either  the  unsettled  state  of  the  country  or  the 
wisdom  of  Ezra  had  not  permitted  the  application  of 
the  power  thus  conferred.  The  Law  was  to  be  volun- 
tarily adopted.  It  was  to  be  received,  as  all  true 
religion  must  be  received,  in  living  faith,  with  the 
acquiescence  of  the  conscience,  judgment,  and  will  of 
those  who  acknowledged  its  obligations. 

The  occasion  for  such  a  reception  of  it  was  found 
when  the  Jews  were  freed  from  the  toil  and  anxiety 
that  accompanied  the  building  of  their  city  walls.  The 
chronicler  says  that  this  was  in  the  seventh  month; 


*  Ezra  vii.  25,  26. 


276       EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

but  he  does  not  give  the  year.     Considering  the  abrupt 
way  in  which  he  has  introduced  the  section  about  the 
reading  of  The  Law,  we  cannot  be  certain  in  what  year 
this    took    place.       If  we   may   venture    to    take    the 
narrative  continuously,  in  connection  with  Nehemiah's 
story  in  the  previous  chapters,  we  shall  get  this  occur- 
rence within  a  week  after  the  completion  of  the  forti- 
fications.    That  was  on  "  the  twenty-fifth  day   of  the 
month  Elul "  * — i.e.,   the    sixth   month.      The    reading 
began  on  "  the  first  day  of  the  seventh  month."  |     That 
is  to  say,  on  this  supposition,  it  followed  immediately 
on  the  first  opportunity  of  leisure.     Then  the  time  was 
specially  appropriate,  for  it  was  the  day  of  the  Feast  of 
Trumpets,  which  was  observed  as  a  public  holiday  and 
an  occasion  for  an  assembly — ''  a  holy  convocation."  X 
On  this  day  the  citizens  met  in  a  favourite  spot,  the 
open  space  just  inside  the  Water  Gate,  at  the  east  end 
of  the  city,  close  to  the  temple,  and  now  part  of  the 
Haram,  or  sacred  enclosure.     They  were  unanimous  in 
their  desire  to  have  no  more  delay  before  hearing  the 
law  which  Ezra  had  brought  up  to  Jerusalem  as  much 
as   thirteen   years   before.     Why  were    they  all  on   a 
sudden  thus  eager,  after  so  long  a  period  of  indifference  ? 
Was  it  that  the  success  of  Nehemiah's  work  had  given 
them  a  new  hope  and  confidence,  a  new  idea,  indeed  ? 
They  now  saw  the  compact  unity  of  Jerusalem  estab- 
lished.    Here  was  the  seal  and  centre   of  their  sepa- 
rateness.     Accepting  this  as  an  accomplished  fact,  the 
Jews  were  ready  and  even  anxious  to  know  that  sacred 
law  in  which   their  distinction  from  other  people  and 
their  consecration  to  Jehovah  were  set  forth. 

Not    less    striking   is    the   manner   in    which    Ezra 

*  Neh.  vi.  15.  j  Neh.  viii.  2.  %  Lev.  xxiii.  24. 


N.  h.  viii.  1-8.]  THE  LA  IF.  277 

met  this  welcome  request  of  the  Jews.  The  scene 
which  follows  is  unique  in  history — the  Great  Scribe 
with  the  precious  roll  in  his  hand  standing  on  a 
temporary  wooden  platform  so  that  he  may  be  seen  by 
everybody  in  the  vast  crowd — seven  Levites  support- 
ing him  on  either  side  * — other  select  Levites  going 
about  among  the  people  after  each  section  of  The  Law 
has  been  read  in  order  to  explain  it  to  separate  groups 
of  the  assembly  f  — the  motley  gathering  comprising 
the  bulk  of  the  citizens,  not  men  only  but  women  also, 
for  the  brutal  Mohammedan  exclusiveness  that  confines 
religious  knowledge  to  one  sex  was  not  anticipated  by 
the  ancient  Jews ;  not  adults  only,  but  children  also, 
"those  that  could  understand,"  for  The  Law  is  for  the 
simplest  minds,  the  religion  of  Israel  is  to  be  popular 
and  domestic — the  whole  of  this  multitude  assembling 
in  the  cool,  fresh  morning  when  the  first  level  rays  of 
the  sun  smite  the  city  walls  from  over  the  Mount  of 
Olives,  and  standing  reverently  hour  after  hour,  till 
the    hot    autumn    noon    puts   an    end    to    the    lengthy 


*  In  Neh.  viii.  4  six  names  are  given  for  the  right-hand  contingent 
and  seven  for  the  left-hand.  But  since  in  the  corresponding  account 
of  I  Esdras  fourteen  names  occur,  one  name  would  seem  to  have 
dropped  out  of  Nehemiah.  The  prominence  given  to  the  Levites  in 
all  these  scenes  and  the  absence  of  reference  to  the  priests  should 
be  noted.  The  Levites  were  still  important  personages,  although 
degraded  from  the  priesthood.  The  priests  were  chiefly  confined  to 
ritual  functions  ;  later  they  entered  on  the  duties  of  civil  government. 
The  Levites  were  occupied  with  teaching  the  people,  with  whom 
they  came  into  closer  contact.  Their  work  corresponded  more  to 
that  of  the  pastoral  office.  In  these  times,  too,  most  of  the  scribes 
seem  to  have  been  Levites. 

t  Not  translating  it  into  the  Aramaic  dialect.  That  would  have 
been  a  superfluous  task,  for  the  Jews  certainly  knew  Hebrew  at  this 
time.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  and  the  prophets  down  to  Malachi  wrote 
in  Hebrew. 


278  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

In  all  this  the  fact  which  comes  out  most  prominently, 
accentuated  b}^  every  detail  of  the  arrangem.ents,  is  the 
popularisation  of  The  Law.  Its  multiplex  precepts 
were  not  only  recited  in  the  hearing  of  mien,  women, 
and  children ;  they  were  carefully  expounded  to  the 
people.  Hitherto  it  had  been  a  matter  of  private  study 
among  learned  men ;  its  early  development  had  been 
confined  to  a  small  group  of  faithful  believers  in  Jehovah  ; 
its  customary  practices  had  been  privately  elaborated 
through  the  ages  almost  like  the  m.ysteries  of  a 
secret  cult ;  and  therefore  its  origin  had  been  buried  in 
hopeless  obscurity.  So  it  was  like  the  priestly  ritual  of 
heathenism.  The  priest  of  Eleusis  guarded  his  secrets 
from  all  but  those  who  w^ere  favoured  by  being  solemnly 
initiated  into  them.  Now  this  unwholesome  condition 
was  to  cease.  The  most  sacred  rites  were  to  be  ex- 
pounded to  all  the  people.  Ezra  knew  that  the  only 
worship  God  would  accept  must  be  offered  with  the 
mind  and  the  heart.  Moreover,  The  Law  concerned 
the  actions  of  the  people  themselves,  their  own  minute 
observance  of  purifications  and  careful  avoidance  of 
defilements,  their  own  offerings  and  festivals.  No 
priestly  performances  could  avail  as  a  substitute  for 
these  popular  religious  observances. 

Yet  much  of  The  Law  was  occupied  with  directions 
concerning  the  functions  of  the  priests  and  the  sacri- 
ficial ritual.  By  acquainting  the  laity  -with  these 
directions,  Ezra  and  his  helpers  v/ere  doing  their  best 
to  fortify  the  nation  against  the  tyranny  of  sacerdo- 
talism. The  Levites,  who  at  this  time  were  probably 
still  sore  at  the  thought  of  their  degradation  and 
jealous  of  the  favoured  line  of  Zadok,  would  naturally 
fall  in  with  such  a  policy.  It  was  the  more  remarkable 
because  the  new  theocracy  was  just  now  coming  into 


Neh.  viii.  1-8.]  THE  LA  IV.  279 

power.  Here  would  be  a  powerful  protection  against 
the  abuse  of  its  privileges  by  the  hierarchy.  Priests, 
all  the  world  over,  have  made  capital  out  of  their 
exclusive  knowledge  of  the  ritual  of  religion.  They 
have  jealously  guarded  their  secrets  from  the  un- 
initiated multitude,  so  as  to  make  themselves  necessary 
to  anxious  worshippers  who  dreaded  to  give  offence  to 
their  gods  or  to  fail  in  their  sacrifices  through  ignor- 
ance of  the  prescribed  methods.  By  committing  the 
knowledge  of  The  Law  to  the  people,  Ezra  protected 
the  Jews  against  this  abuse.  Everything  was  to  be 
above  board,  in  broad  daylight ;  and  the  degradation  of 
ignorant  worship  was  not  to  be  encouraged,  much  as  a 
corrupt  priesthood  in  later  times  might  desire  it.  An 
indirect  consequence  of  this  publication  of  The  Law 
with  the  careful  instruction  of  the  people  in  its  contents 
was  that  the  element  of  knowledge  took  a  more  exalted 
position  in  religion.  It  is  not  the  magical  priest,  it  is 
the  logical  scribe  who  really  leads  the  people  now. 
Ideas  will  mean  more  than  in  the  old  days  of  obscure 
ritual.  There  is  an  end  to  the  *'  dim  religious  light." 
Henceforth  ToraJi — Instruction — is  to  be  the  most 
fundamental  ground  of  faith. 

It  is  important  that  we  should  see  clearly  what  was 
contained  in  this  roll  of  The  Law  out  of  which  Ezra 
read  to  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem.  The  distress  with 
which  its  contents  were  received  would  lead  us  to 
suppose  that  the  grave  minatory  passages  of  Deuter- 
onomy were  especially  prominent  in  the  reading.  We 
cannot  gather  from  the  present  scene  any  further 
indications  of  the  subjects  brought  before  the  Jews. 
But  from  other  parts  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah  we  can 
learn  for  certain  that  the  whole  of  the  Pentateuch  was 
now  introduced  to  the  people.     If  it  was  not  all  read 


28o  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


out  in  the  Ecclesia,  it  was  all  in  the  hands  of  Ezra,  and 
its  several  parts  were  made  known  from  time  to  time 
as  occasion  required.  First,  we  may  infer  that  in  ad- 
dition to  Deuteronomy  Ezra's  law  contained  the  ancient 
Jehovistic  narrative,  because  the  treatment  of  mixed 
marriages  *  refers  to  the  contents  of  this  portion  of  the 
Pentateuch. t  Secondly,  we  may  see  that  it  included 
"  The  Law  of  Holiness,"  because  the  regulations 
concerning  the  sabbatic  year  J  are  copied  from  that 
collection  of  rules  about  defilement  and  consecration. § 
Thirdly,  we  may  be  equally  sure  that  it  did  not  lack 
''The  Priestly  Code" — the  elaborate  system  of  ritual 
which  occupies  the  greater  part  of  Numbers  and 
Leviticus — because  the  law  of  the  firstfruits  ||  is  taken 
from  that  source. IF  Here,  then,  we  find  allusions  to 
the  principal  constituent  elements  of  the  Pentateuch 
scattered  over  the  brief  Book  of  Nehemiah.  It  is 
clear,  therefore,  that  the  great  accretion  of  customs  and 
teachings,  which  only  reached  completion  after  the  close 
of  the  captivity,  was  the  treasure  Ezra  now  introduced 
to  his  people.  Henceforth  nothing  less  can  be  under- 
stood Vv^hen  the  title  "  The  Law "  is  used.  From  this 
time  obedience  to  the  Torah  will  involve  subjection  to 
the  Vv^hole  system  of  priestly  and  sacrificial  regulations, 
to  all  the  rules  of  cleanness  and  consecration  and 
sacrifice  contained  in  the  Pentateuch.** 

A  more  difficult  point  to  be  determined  is,  how  far 

*  Neb.  X.  30.  §  Lev.  xxv.  2-7. 

f  Exod.  xxxiv.  16.     II  Neh.  x.  35-39. 

X  Neh.  X.  31.  ^  Lev.  xxvii.  30;  Num.  xv.  20  ff.,  xviii.  11-32. 

**  Strictly  speaking,  the  Hexateuch,  as  "Joshua"  was  undoubtedly 
included  in  the  volume.  But  the  familiar  term  Pentateuch  may  serve 
here,  as  it  is  to  the  legal  requirements  contained  in  the  earlier  books 
that  reference  is  made. 


Nell.  viii.  1-8.]  THE  LAW.  281 

this  Pentateuch  was  really  a  new  thing  when  it  was 
introduced  by  Ezra.  Here  we  must  separate  two  very 
different  questions.  If  they  had  always  been  kept 
apart,  much  confusion  would  have  been  avoided.  The 
first  is  the  question  of  the  novelty  of  The  Law  to  the 
fczvs.  There  is  little  difficulty  in  answering  this  ques- 
tion. The  very  process  of  reading  The  Law  and  ex- 
plaining it  goes  on  the  assumption  that  it  is  not  known. 
The  people  receive  it  as  something  strange  and  startling. 
Moreover,  this  scene  of  the  revelation  of  The  Law  to 
Israel  is  entirely  in  harmony  with  the  previous  history 
of  the  nation.  Whenever  The  Law  was  shaped  as  we 
now  know  it,  it  is  clear  that  it  was  not  practised  in  its 
present  form  by  the  Jews  before  Ezra's  day.  We  have 
no  contemporary  evidence  of  the  use  of  it  in  the  earlier 
period.  We  have  clear  evidence  that  conduct  contrary 
to  many  of  its  precepts  was  carried  on  with  impunity, 
and  even  encouraged  by  prophets  and  religious  leaders 
without  any  protest  from  priests  or  scribes.  The  com- 
plete law  is  new  to  Israel.  But  there  is  a  second 
question — viz.,  how  far  was  this  law  new  in  itself} 
Nobody  can  suppose  that  it  was  an  absolutely  novel 
creation  of  the  exile,  with  no  roots  in  the  past.  Their 
repeated  references  to  Moses  show  that  its  supporters 
relegated  its  origin  to  a  dim  antiquity,  and  we  should 
belie  all  we  know  of  their  character  if  we  did  not 
allow  that  they  were  acting  in  good  faith.  But  we 
have  no  evidence  that  The  Law  had  been  completed, 
codified,  and  written  out  in  full  before  the  time  of 
Ezra.  In  antiquity,  when  writing  was  economised 
and  memory  cultivated  to  a  degree  of  accuracy  that 
seems  to  us  almost  miraculous,  it  would  be  possible  to 
hand  down  a  considerable  system  of  ritual  or  of  juris- 
prudence  by  tradition.     Even  this   stupendous  act  of 


282  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

memory,  would  not  exceed  that  of  the  rhapsodists  who 
preserved  and  transmitted  the  unwritten  Iliad.  But 
we  are  not  driven  to  such  an  extreme  view.  We  do 
not  know  how  much  of  The  Law  may  have  been  com- 
mitted to  writing  in  earher  ages.  Some  of  it  was, 
certainly.  It  bears  evidence  of  its  history  in  the 
several  strata  of  which  it  is  composed,  and  which  must 
have  been  deposited  successively.  Deuteronomy,  in 
its  essence  and  original  form,  was  certainly  known 
before  the  captivity.  So  were  the  Jehovistic  narrative 
and  the  Law  of  the  Covenant.  The  only  question  as 
regards  Ezra's  day  turns  on  the  novelty  of  the  Priestly 
Code,  with  the  Law  of  Holiness,  and  the  final  editing 
and  redaction  of  the  whole.  This  is  adumbrated  in 
Ezekiel  and  the  degradation  of  the  Levites,  who  are 
identified  with  the  priests  in  Deuteronomy,  but  set  in  a 
lower  rank  in  Leviticus,  assigned  to  its  historical  occa- 
sion. Here,  then,  we  see  the  latest  part  of  Ezra's  law 
in  the  making.  It  was  not  created  by  the  scribe.  It 
was  formed  out  of  traditional  usages  of  the  priests, 
modified  by  recent  directions  from  a  prophet.  The 
origin  of  these  usages  was  lost  in  antiquity,  and  there- 
fore it  was  natural  to  attribute  them  to  Moses,  the  great 
founder  of  the  nation.  We  cannot  even  affirm  that 
Ezra  carried  out  the  last  redaction  of  The  Law  with  his 
own  hand,  that  he  codified  the  traditional  usages,  the 
"  Common  Law  "  of  Israel.  What  we  know  is,  that  he 
published  this  law.  That  he  also  edited  it  is  an  in- 
ference drawn  from  his  intimate  connection  with  the 
work  as  student  and  scribe,  and  supported  by  the 
current  of  later  traditions.  But  while  this  is  possible, 
what  is  indubitable  is  that  to  Ezra  is  due  the  glory  of 
promulgating  the  law  and  making  it  pass  into  the  life 
of  the  nation.     Henceforth  Judaism  is  legalism.     We 


Nch.  viii.  1-8.]  THE  LAW,  283 


know  this  in  its  imperfection  and  its  difference  from 
the  spiritual  faith  of  Christ.  To  the  contemporaries 
of  Ezra  it  indicated  a  stage  of  progress — knowledge  in 
place  of  superstitious  bondage  to  the  priesthood,  con- 
scientious obedience  to  ordinances  instituted  for  the 
public  welfare  instead  of  careless  indifference  or  ob- 
stinate self-will.  Therefore  its  appearance  marked  a 
forward  step  in  the  course  of  Divine  revelation. 


CHAPTER   XXV. 

THE  JOY  OF   THE  LORD. 

Nehemiah  viii.  9-18. 

"  A  LL  the  people  wept  when  they  heard  the  words 
ZjL  of  the  law."  Was  it  for  this  mournful  end  that 
Ezra  had  studied  the  sacred  law  and  guarded  it  through 
the  long  years  of  political  unrest,  until  at  length  he  was 
able  to  make  it  known  with  all  the  pomp  and  circum- 
stance of  a  national  festival  ?  Evidently  the  leaders 
of  the  people  had  expected  no  such  result.  But,  dis- 
appointing as  it  was,  it  might  have  been  worse.  The 
reading  might  have  been  listened  to  with  indifference ; 
or  the  great,  stern  law  might  have  been  rejected  with 
execration,  or  scoffed  at  with  incredulity.  Nothing  of 
the  kind  happened.  There  was  no  doubt  as  to  the 
Tightness  of  The  Law,  no  reluctance  to  submit  to  its 
yoke,  no  disposition  to  ignore  its  requirements.  This 
law  had  come  with  all  the  authority  of  the  Persian 
government  to  sanction  it ;  and  yet  it  is  evidently  no 
fear  of  the  magistrate,  but 'their  own  convictions,  their 
confirming  consciences,  that  here  influence  the  people 
and  determine  their  attitude  to  it.  Thus  Ezra's  labours 
were  really  honoured  by  the  Jews,  though  their  fruits 
v/ere  received  so  sorrowfully. 

We  must  not  suppose  that  the  Jev/s  of  Ezra's   day 

anticipated  the  ideas  of  St.  Paul.     It  was  not  a  Christian 

284 


Nell.  viii.  9-18.]       THE  JOY  OF  THE  LORD.  285 

objection  to  law  that  troubled  them ;  they  did  not  com- 
plain of  its  externalism,  its  bondage,  its  formal  require- 
ments and  minute  details.  To  imagine  that  these 
features  of  The  Law  were  regarded  with  disapproval 
by  the  first  hearers  of  it  is  to  credit  them  with  an 
immense  advance  in  thought  beyond  their  leaders — Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  and  the  Levites.  It  is  clear  that  their  grief 
arose  simply  from  their  perception  of  their  own  miserable 
imperfections  in  contrast  to  the  lofty  requirements  of 
The  Law,  and  in  view  of  its  sombre  threats  of  punish- 
ment for  disobedience.  The  discovery  of  a  new  ideal 
of  conduct  above  that  with  which  we  have  hitherto 
been  satisfied  naturally  provokes  painful  stings  of  con- 
science, which  the  old  salve,  compounded  of  the  com- 
fortable little  notions  we  once  cherished,  will  not 
neutralise.  In  the  new  light  of  the  higher  truth  we 
suddenly  discover  that  the  "  robe  of  righteousness  "  in 
which  we  have  been  parading  is  but  as  "  filthy  rags." 
Then  our  once  vaunted  attainments  become  despicable 
in  our  own  eyes.  The  eminence  on  which  we  have 
been  standing  so  proudly  is  seen  to  be  a  wretched 
mole-hill  compared  with  the  awful  snow-peak  from 
which  the  clouds  have  just  dispersed.  Can  we  ever 
climb  that  ?  Goodness  now  seems  to  be  hopelessly 
unattainable ;  yet  never  before  was  it  so  desirable, 
because  never  before  did  it  shine  with  so  rare  and 
fascinating  a  lustre. 

But,  it  may  be  objected,  was  not  the  religious  and 
moral  character  of  the  teaching  of  the  great  prophets — of 
Hosea,  Isaiah,  Micah,  Jeremiah — larger  and  higher  and 
more  spiritual  than  the  legalism  of  the  Pentateuch  ? 
That  may  be  granted  ;  but  it  is  not  to  the  point  here. 
The  lofty  prophetic  teaching  had  never  been  accepted 
by  the  nation.     The  prophets  had  been  voices  crying  in 


286  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

the  wilderness.  Their  great  spiritual  thoughts  had 
never  been  seriously  followed  except  by  a  small  group 
of  devout  souls.  It  was  the  Christian  Church  that  first 
built  on  the  foundation  of  the  prophets.  But  in  Ezra's 
day  the  Jews  as  a  body  frankly  accepted  The  Law. 
Whether  this  were  higher  or  lower  than  the  ideal  of 
prophetism  does  not  affect  the  case.  The  significant 
fact  is  that  is  was  higher  than  any  ideal  the  people  had 
hitherto  adopted  in  practice.  The  perception  of  this 
fact  was  most  distressing  to  them. 

Nevertheless  the  Israelite  leaders  did  not  share  the 
feeling  of  grief.  In  their  eyes  the  sorrow,  of  the  Jews 
was  a  great  mistake.  It  was  even  a  wrong  thing  for 
them  thus  to  distress  themselves.  Ezra  loved  The 
Law,  and  therefore  it  was  to  him  a  dreadful  surprise  to 
discover  that  the  subject  of  his  devoted  studies  was 
regarded  so  differently  by  his  brethren.  Nehemiah 
and  the  Levites  shared  his  more  cheerful  view  of  the 
situation.  Lyrics  of  this  and  subsequent  ages  bear 
testimony  to  the  passionate  devotion  with  which  the 
sacred  Torah  was  cherished  by  loyal  disciples.  The 
author  of  the  hundred  and  nineteenth  Psalm  ransacks 
his  vocabulary  for  varying  phrases  on  which  to  ring 
the  changes  in  praise*  of  the  law,  the  judgments,  the 
statutes,  the  commandments  of  God.     He  cries  : — 

"  I  will  delight  in  Thy  statutes  : 

I  will  not  forget  Thy  word. 

*  *  *  * 

"  Open  Thou  mine  eyes,  that  I  may  behold 
Wondrous  things  out  of  Thy  law. 

*  *  *  * 

"  Unless  Thy  law  had  been  my  delight, 
I  should  have  perished  in  mine  affliction. 

*  *  *  * 

"  Great  peace  have  they  that  love  Thy  law, 
And  they  have  none  occasion  of  stumbhng." 


Neh.viii.9-i8.]       THE  JOY  OF  THE  LORD.  287 

Moreover,  the  student  of  The  Law  to-day  can  per- 
ceive that  its  intention  was  beneficent.  It  maintained 
righteousness;  and  righteousness  is  the  chief  good.  It 
regulated  the  mutual  relations  of  men  with  regard  to 
justice ;  it  ordained  purity  ;  it  contained  many  humane 
rules  for  the  protection  of  men  and  even  of  animals  ; 
it  condescended  to  most  wholesome  sanitary  directions. 
Then  it  declared  that  he  who  kept  its  ordinances  should 
live,  not  merely  by  reason  of  an  arbitrary  arrangement, 
but  because  it  pointed  out  the  natural  and  necessary 
way  of  life  and  health.  The  Divine  Spirit  that  had 
guided  the  development  of  it  had  presided  over  some- 
thing more  inviting  than  the  forging  of  fetters  for  a 
host  of  miserable  slaves,  something  more  useful  than 
the  creation  of  a  tantalising  exemplar  that  should  be 
the  despair  of  every  copyist.  Ezra  and  his  fellow- 
leaders  knew  the  intention  of  The  Law.  This  was  the 
ground  of  their  joyous  confidence  in  contemplation  of 
it.  They  were  among  those  who  had  been  led  by  their 
personal  religion  into  possession  of  "  the  secret  of  the 
Lord."  They  had  acquainted  themselves  with  Him, 
and  therefore  they  were  at  peace.  Their  example 
teaches  us  that  we  must  penetrate  beyond  the  letter  to 
the  spirit  of  revelation  if  we  would  discover  its  hidden 
thoughts  of  love.  When  we  do  so  even  The  Law  will 
be  found  to  enshrine  an  evangel.  Not  that  these  men 
of  the  olden  times  perceived  the  fanciful  symbolism 
which  many  Christians  have  delighted  to  extract  from 
the  most  mechanical  details  of  the  tabernacle  ritual. 
Their  eyes  were  fixed  on  the  gracious  Divine  purpose 
of  creating  a  holy  nation — separate  and  pure — and 
The  Law  seemed  to  be  the  best  instrument  for  accom- 
plishing that  purpose.  Meanwhile  its  impracticability 
did  not  strike  them,  because  they  thought  of  the  thing 


288  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


in  itself  rather  than  of  the  relation  of  men  to  it. 
Religious  melancholy  springs  from  habits  of  sub- 
jectivit}'.  The  joyous  spirit  is  that  which  forgets  self 
in  the  contemplation  of  the  thoughts  of  God.  It  is  our 
meditation  of  Him — not  of  self — that  is  sweet. 

Of  course  this  would  have  been  unreasonable  if  it 
had  totally  ignored  human  conditions  and  their  relation 
to  the  Divine.  In  that  case  Ezra  and  his  companions 
would  have  been  vain  dreamers,  and  the  sorrowing 
multitude  people  of  common-sense  perceptions.  But 
we  must  remember  that  the  new  rehgious  movement 
was  inspired  by  faith.  It  is  faith  that  bridges  the  vast 
chasm  between  the  real  and  the  ideal.  God  had  given 
The  Law  in  lovingkindness  and  tender  merc}^  Then 
God  would  make  the  attainment  of  His  will  revealed  in 
it  possible.  The  part  of  brave  and  humble  men  was  to 
look  away  from  themselves  to  the  revelation  of  God's 
thought  concerning  them  with  grateful  admiration  of  its 
glorious  perfection. 

While  considerations  of  this  sort  would  make  it 
possible  for  the  leaders  to  regard  The  Law  in  a  very 
different  spirit  from  that  manifested  by  the  rest  of  the 
Jews,  other  reflections  led  them  to  go  further  and  check 
the  outburst  of  grief  as  both  unseemly  and  hurtful. 

It  was  unseemly,  because  it  was  marring  the  beauty 
of  a  great  festival.  The  Jews  were  to  stay  their  grief 
seeing  that  the  day  was  holy  unto  the  Lord.*  This 
was  as  much  as  to  say  that  sorrow  was  defiling.  The 
world  had  to  wait  for  the  religion  of  the  cross  to  reveal 
to  it  the  sanctity  of  sorrow.  Undoubtedly  the  Jewish 
festivals  were  joyous  celebrations.  It  is  the  greatest 
mistake  to  represent  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament 

*  Neh.  viii.  9. 


Nch.  viii.  9-18.]       THE  JOY  OF  THE  LORD.  289 

as  a  gloomy  cult  overshadowed  by  the  thunder-clouds  of 
Sinai.  On  the  contrary,  its  greatest  offices  were  cele* 
brated  with  music,  dancing,  and  feasting.  The  high 
day  was  a  hoUday,  sunny  and  mirthful.  It  would  be  a 
pity  to  spoil  such  an  occasion  with  unseasonable  lamen- 
tations. But  Nehemiah  and  Ezra  must  have  had  a 
deeper  thought  than  this  in  their  deprecation  of  grief  at 
the  festival.  To  allow  such  behaviour  is  to  entertain 
unworthy  feelings  towards  God.  A  day  sacred  to  the 
Lord  is  a  day  in  which  His  presence  is  especially  felt. 
To  draw  near  to  God  with  no  other  feelings  than  emotions 
of  fear  and  grief  is  to  misapprehend  His  nature  and 
His  disposition  towards  His  people.  Worship  should 
be  inspired  with  the  gladness  of  grateful  hearts  praising 
God,  because  otherwise  it  would  discredit  His  goodness. 

This  leads  to  a  thought  of  wider  range  and  still  more 
profound  significance,  a  thought  that  flashes  out  of  the 
sacred  page  like  a  brilliant  gem,  a  thought  so  rich 
and  glad  and  bountiful  that  it  speaks  for  its  own  inspi- 
ration as  one  of  the  great  Divine  ideas  of  Scripture — 
"  The  joy  of  the  Lord  is  your  strength."  Though  the 
unseemliness  of  mourning  on  a  feast  day  was  the  first 
and  most  obvious  consideration  urged  by  the  Jewish 
leaders  in  their  expostulation  with  the  distressed  multi- 
tude, the  real  justification  for  their  rebukes  and  exhorta- 
tions is  to  be  found  in  the  magnificent  spiritual  idea 
that  they  here  give  expression  to.  In  view  of  such  a 
conviction  as  they  now  gladly  declare  they  would 
regard  the  lamentation  of  the  Jews  as  more  than 
unseemly,  as  positively  hurtful  and  even  wrong. 

By  the  expression  "  the  joy  of  the  Lord  "  it  seems 
clear  that  Nehemiah  and  his  associates  meant  a  joy 
which  may  be  experienced  by  men  through  their  fellow- 
ship   with    God.      The   phrase  could   be   used   for   the 

19 


290       EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

gladness  of  God  Himself;  as  we  speak  of  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  or  the  love  of  God,  so  we  might  speak  of 
His  joy  in  reference  to  His  own  infinite  life  and  con- 
sciousness. But  in  the  case  before  us  the  drift  of  the 
passage  directs  our  thoughts  to  the  moods  and  feelings 
of  men.  The  Jews  are  giving  way  to  grief,  and  they 
are  rebuked  for  so  doing  and  encouraged  to  rejoice.  In 
this  situation  some  thoughts  favourable  to  joy  on  their 
part  are  naturally  suitable.  Accordingly  they  are 
called  to  enter  into  a  pure  and  lofty  gladness  in  which 
they  are  assured  they  will  find  their  strength. 

This  "joy  of  the  Lord,"  then,  is  the  joy  that  springs  up 
in  our  hearts  by  means  of  our  relation  to  God.  It  is  a 
God-given  gladness,  and  it  is  found  in  communion  with 
God.  Nevertheless  the  other  '^joy  of  the  Lord"  is 
not  to  be  left  out  of  account  when  we  think  of  the 
gladness  which  comes  to  us  from  God,  for  the  highest 
joy  is  possible  to  us  just  because  it  is  first  experienced 
by  God.  There  could  be  no  joy  in  communion  with  a 
morose  divinity.  The  service  of  Moloch  must  have 
been  a  terror,  a  perfect  agony  to  his  most  loyal  devotees. 
The  feehngs  of  a  worshipper  will  always  be  reflections 
from  what  he  thinks  he  perceives  in  the  countenance  of 
his  god.  They  will  be  gloomy  if  the  god  is  a  sombre 
personage,  and  cheerful  if  he  is  a  glad  being.  Now 
the  revelation  of  God  in  the  Bible  is  the  unveiling 
with  growing  clearness  of  a  countenance  of  unspeakable 
love  and  beauty  and  gladness.  He  is  made  known  to 
us  as  "  the  blessed  God  " — the  happy  God.  Then  the  joy 
of  His  children  is  the  overflow  of  His  own  deep  glad- 
ness streaming  down  to  them.  This  is  the  ^'joy  in  the 
presence  of  the  angels  "  which,  springing  from  the  great 
heart  of  God,  makes  the  happiness  of  returning  penitents, 
so  that  they  share  in  their  Father's  delight,  as  the  prodigal 


Nch.  viii.  9-i8.]       THE  JOY  OF   THE  LORD.  291 

shares  in  the  home  festivities  when  the  fatted  calf  is 
killed.  This  same  communication  of  gladness  is  seen  in 
the  Hfe  of  our  Lord,  not  only  during  those  early  sunny 
days  in  Galilee  when  His  ministry  opened  under  a  cloud- 
less sky,  but  even  amid  the  darkness  of  the  last  hours 
at  Jerusalem,  for  in  His  final  discourse  Jesus  prayed 
that  His  joy  might  be  in  His  disciples  in  order  that 
their  joy  might  be  full.  A  more  generous  perception 
of  this  truth  would  make  religion  like  sunshine  and 
music,  like  the  blooming  of  spring  flowers  and  the  out- 
burst of  woodland  melody  about  the  path  of  the  Christian 
pilgrim.  It  is  clear  that  Jesus  Christ  expected  this  to 
be  the  case  since  He  commenced  His  teaching  with 
the  word  "  Blessed."  St.  Paul,  too,  saw  the  same 
possibihty,  as  his  repeated  encouragements  to  "Rejoice" 
bear  witness.  Religion  may  be  compared  to  one  of 
those  Italian  city  churches  which  are  left  outwardly 
bare  and  gloomy,  while  within  they  are  replete  with 
treasures  of  art.  We  must  cross  the  threshold,  push 
aside  the  heavy  curtain,  and  tread  the  sacred  pavement, 
if  we  would  see  the  beauty  of  sculptured  column  and 
mural  fresco  and  jewelled  altar-piece.  Just  in  proportion 
as  we  draw  near  to  God  shall  we  behold  the  joy  and  love 
that  ever  dwell  in  Him,  till  the  vision  of  these  wonders 
kindles  our  love  and  gladness. 

Now  the  great  idea  that  is  here  suggested  to  us 
connects  this  Divine  joy  with  strength — the  joy  is  an 
inspiration  of  energy.  By  the  nature  of  things  joy  is 
exhilarating,  while  pain  is  depressing.  Physiologists  re- 
cognise it  as  a  law  of  animal  organisms  that  happiness  is 
a  nerve  tonic.  It  would  seem  that  the  same  law  obtains 
in  spiritual  experience.  On  the  other  hand,  nothing  is 
more  certain  than  that  there  are  enervating  pleasures, 
and    that    the    free    indulgence    in    pleasure    generally 


292  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


weakens  the  character ;  with  this  goes  the  equally 
certain  truth  that  men  may  be  braced  by  suffering,  that 
the  east  wind  of  adversity  may  be  a  real  stimulant. 
How  shall  we  reconcile  these  contradictory  positions  ? 
Clearly  there  are  different  kinds  and  grades  of  delight, 
and  different  ways  of  taking  and  using  every  form  of 
gladness.  Pure  hedonism  cannot  but  be  a  weak  system 
of  life.  It  is  the  Spartan,  not  the  Sybarite,  who  is 
capable  of  heroic  deeds.  Even  Epicurus,  whose  name 
has  been  abused  to  shelter  low  pleasure-seeking, 
perceived,  as  clearly  as  "The  Preacher/'  the  melancholy 
truth  that  the  life  that  is  given  over  to  the  satisfaction 
of  personal  desires  is  but  ''  vanity  of  vanities."  The 
joy  that  exhilarates  is  not  sought  as  a  final  goal. 
It  comes  in  by  the  way  when  we  are  pursuing  some 
objective  end.  Then  this  purest  joy  is  as  far  above  the 
pleasure  of  the  self-indulgent  as  heaven  is  above  hell. 
It  may  even  be  found  side  by  side  with  bodily  pain,  as 
when  martyrs  exult  in  their  flames,  or  when  stricken 
souls  in  mor^' prosaic  circumstances  awake  to  the  won- 
derful perception  of  a  rare  Divine  gladness.  It  is  this 
joy  that  gives  strength.  There  is  enthusiasm  in  it.  Such 
a  joy  not  being  an  end  in  itself  is  a  means  to  a  great 
practical  end.  God's  glad  children  are  strong  to  do  and 
bear  His  will,  strong  in  their  very  gladness. 

This  was  good  news  to  the  Jews,  outwardly  but  a 
feeble  flock  and  a  prey  to  the  ravening  wolves  from 
neighbouring  lands.  They  had  recovered  hope  after 
building  their  walls  ;  but  these  hastily  constructed 
fortifications  did  not  afford  them  their  most  secure 
stronghold.  Their  refuge  was  God.  They  carried  bows 
and  spears  and  swords ;  but  the  strength  with  which 
they  wielded  these  weapons  consisted  in  the  enthu- 
siasm of  a  Divine  gladness — not  the  orgiastic  fury  of 


Neh.  viii.  9-18.]       THE  JOY  OF  THE  LORD.  293 

the  heathen,  but  the  deep,  strong  joy  of  men  who  knew 
the  secret  of  their  Lord,  who  possessed  what  Words- 
worth calls  "  inward  glee."  This  joy  was  essentially 
a  moral  strength.  It  bestowed  the  power  wherewith 
to  keep  the  law.  Here  was  the  answer  to  the  dis- 
couragement of  the  people  in  their  dawning  perception 
of  the  lofty  requirements  of  God's  holy  will.  The 
Christian  can  best  find  energy  for  service,  as  well  as  the 
calm  strength  of  patience,  in  that  still  richer  Divine 
gladness  which  is  poured  into  his  heart  by  the  grace  of 
Christ.  It  is  not  only  unfortunate  for  anybody  to  be  a 
mournful  Christian;  it  is  dangerous,  hurtful,  even  wrong. 
Therefore  the  gloomy  servant  of  God  is  to  be  rebuked 
for  missing  the  Divine  gladness.  Seeing  that  the  source 
of  it  is  in  God,  and  not  in  the  Christian  himself,  it  is 
attainable  and  possible  to  the  most  sorrowful.  He  who 
has  found  this  ''  pearl  of  great  price  "  can  afford  to  miss 
much  else  in  life  and  yet  go  on  his  way  rejoicing. 

It  was  natural  that  the  Jews  should  have  been  en- 
couraged to  give  expression  to  the  Divine  joy  at  a  great 
festival.  The  final  harvest-home  of  the  year,  the 
merry  celebration  of  the  vintage,  was  then  due.  No 
Jewish  feast  was  more  cheerful  than  this,  which  ex- 
pressed gratitude  for  ''wine  that  maketh  glad  the  heart 
of  man."  The  superiority  of  Judaism  over  heathenism 
is  seen  in  the  tremendous  contrast  between  the  simple 
gaiety  of  the  Jewish  Feast  of  Tabernacles  and  the  gross 
debauchery  of  the  Bacchanalian  orgies  which  disgraced 
a  similar  occasion  in  the  pagan  world.  It  is  to  our 
shame  in  modern  Christendom  that  we  dare  not  imitate 
the  Jews  here,  knowing  too  well  that  if  we  tried  to 
do  so  we  should  only  sink  to  the  heathen  level.  Our 
Feast  of  Tabernacles  would  certainly  become  a  Feast 
of  Bacchus,  bestial  and  wicked.     Happily  the  Jews  did 


294  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


not  feel  the  Teutonic  danger  of  intemperance.  Their 
festival  recognised  the  Divine  bounty  in  nature,  in 
its  richest,  ripest  autumn  fruitfulness,  which  was  like 
the  smile  of  God  breaking  out  through  His  works  to 
cheer  His  children.  Bivouacking  in  greenwood  bowers, 
the  Jews  did  their  best  to  return  to  the  life  of  nature 
and  share  its  autumn  gladness.  The  chronicler  informs 
us  that  since  the  days  of  Joshua  the  Jews  had  never 
observed  the  feast  as  they  did  now — never  with 
such  great  gladness  and  never  so  truly  after  the 
directions  of  their  law.  Although  the  actual  words 
he  gives  as  from  The  Law  *  are  not  to  be  found  in  the 
Pentateuch,  they  sum  up  the  regulations  of  that  work. 
This  then  is  the  first  application  of  The  Law  which  the 
people  have  received  with  so  much  distress.  It  ordains 
a  glad  festival.  So  much  brighter  is  religion  when  it  is 
understood  and  practised  than  when  it  is  only  contem- 
plated from  afar  !  Now  the  reading  of  The  Law  can 
go  on  day  by  day,  and  be  received  with  joy. 

Finally,  Hke  the  Christians  who  collected  food  and 
money  at  the  Agape  for  their  poorer  brethren  and  for 
the  martyrs  in  prison,  the  Jews  were  to  "  send  portions  " 
to  the  needy.!  The  rejoicing  was  not  to  be  selfish ; 
it  was  to  stimulate  practical  kindness.  Here  was  its 
safeguard.  We  shrink  from  accepting  joy  too  freely 
lest  it  should  be  followed  by  some  terrible  Nemesis  ; 
but  if,  instead  of  gloating  over  it  in  secret,  selfishly 
and  greedily,  we  use  it  as  a  talent,  and  endeavour  to 
lessen  the  sorrows  of  others  by  inviting  them  to  share 
it,  the  heathenish  dread  is  groundless.  He  who  is 
doing  his  utmost  to  help  his  brother  may  dare  to  be 
very  happy. 

*  Neh.  viii.  14,  15.  f  Neh.  viii.  12. 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

THE  RELIGION  OF  HISTORY. 

Nehemiah  ix. 

AFTER  the  carnival — Lent.  This  Catholic  pro- 
cedure was  anticipated  by  the  Jews  in  the  days 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  The  merry  feast  of  Taber- 
nacles was  scarcely  over,  when,  permitting  an  interval 
of  but  a  single  day,  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem  plunged 
into  a  demonstration  of  mourning — fasting,  sitting  in 
sackcloth,  casting  dust  on  their  heads,  abjuring  foreign 
connections,  confessing  their  own  and  their  fathers' 
sins.  Although  the  singular  revulsion  of  feeling  may 
have  been  quite  spontaneous  on  the  part  of  the  people, 
the  violent  reaction  to  which  it  gave  rise  was  sanctioned 
by  the  authorities.  In  an  open-air  meeting  which 
lasted  for  six  hours — three  of  Bible-reading  and  three 
of  confession  and  worship — the  Levites  took  the  lead, 
as  they  had  done  at  the  publication  of  The  Law  a  few 
weeks  earlier.  But  these  very  men  had  rebuked  the 
former  outburst  of  lamentation.  Must  we  suppose  that 
their  only  objection  on  that  occasion  was  that  the 
mourning  was  then  untimely,  because  it  was  indulged 
in  at  a  festival,  whereas  it  ought  to  have  been  postponed 
to  a  fast  day  ?  If  that  were  all,  we  should  have  to  con- 
template a  miserably  artificial  condition  of  affairs.  Real 
emotions  refuse  to  come  and  go  at  the  bidding  of  officials 


296  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


pedantically  set  on  regulating  their  alternate  recur- 
rence in  accordance  with  a  calendar  of  the  church 
year.  A  theatrical  representation  of  feeling  may  be 
drilled  into  some  such  orderly  procession.  But  true 
feeling  itself  is  of  all  things  in  the  universe  the  most 
restive  under  direct  orders. 

We  must  look  a  little  deeper.  The  Levites  had 
given  a  great  spiritual  reason  for  the  restraint  of 
grief  in  their  wonderful  utterance,  "  The  joy  of  the 
Lord  is  your  strength."  This  noble  thought  is  not 
an  elixir  to  be  administered  or  withheld  according  to 
the  recurrence  of  ecclesiastical  dates.  If  it  is  true  at 
all,  it  is  eternally  true.  Although  the  application  of  it 
is  not  always  a  fact  of  experience,  the  reason  for  the 
fluctuations  in  our  personal  relations  to  it  is  not  to  be 
looked  for  in  the  almanack ;  it  will  be  found  in  those 
dark  passages  of  human  life  which,  of  their  own  accord, 
shut  out  the  sunlight  of  Divine  gladness.  There  is 
then  no  absolute  inconsistency  in  the  action  of  the 
Levites.  And  yet  perhaps  they  may  have  perceived 
that  they  had  been  hasty  in  their  repression  of  the  first 
outburst  of  grief;  or  at  all  events  that  they  did  not 
then  see  the  whole  truth  of  the  matter.  There  was 
some  ground  for  lamentation  after  all,  and  though  the 
expression  of  sorrow  at  a  festival  seemed  to  them 
untimely,  they  were  bound  to  admit  its  fitness  a  little 
later.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  another  subject  was 
now  brought  under  the  notice  of  the  people.  The 
contemplation  of  the  revelation  of  God's  will  should  not 
produce  grief.  But  the  consideration  of  man's  conduct 
cannot  but  lead  to  that  result.  At  the  reading  of  the 
Divine  law  the  Jews'  lamentation  was  rebuked  ;  at  the 
recital  of  their  own  history  it  was  encouraged.  Yet 
even  here  it  w^as  not  to  be  abject  and  hopeless.      The 


Neh.  ix.]  THE   RELIGION  OF  HISTORY.  297 

Levites  exhorted  the  people  to  shake  off  the  lethargy  of 
sorrow,  to  stand  up  a.x\d  bless  the  Lord  their  God.  Even 
in  the  very  act  of  confessing  sin  we  have  a  special 
reason  for  praising  God,  because  the  consciousness  of 
our  guilt  in  His  sight  must  heighten  our  appreciation 
of  His  marvellous  forbearance. 

The  Jews'  confession  of  sin  led  up  to  a  prayer  which 
the  Septuagint  ascribes  to  Ezra.  It  does  so,  however, 
in  a  phrase  that  manifestly  breaks  the  context,  and  thus 
betrays  its  origin  in  an  interpolation.*  Nevertheless 
the  tone  of  the  prayer,  and  even  its  very  language, 
remind  us  forcibly  of  the  Great  Scribe's  outpouring  of 
soul  over  the  mixed  marriages  of  his  people  recorded  in 
Ezra  ix.  No  one  was  more  fitted  to  lead  the  Jews  in 
the  later  act  of  devotion,  and  it  is  only  reasonable  to 
conclude  that  the  work  was  undertaken  by  the  one  man 
to  whose  lot  it  would  naturally  fall. 

The  prayer  is  very  like  some  of  the  historical  psalms. 
By  pointing  to  the  variegated  picture  of  the  History  of 
Israel,  it  shows  how  God  reveals  Himself  through 
events.  This  suggests  the  probability  that  the  three 
hours'  reading  of  the  fast  day  had  been  taken  from 
the  historical  parts  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  religious 
teachers  of  Israel  knew  what  riches  of  instruction  were 
buried  in  the  history  of  their  nation,  and  they  had  the 
wisdom  to  unearth  those  treasures  for  the  benefit  of 
their  own  age.  It  is  strange  that  we  English  have 
made  so  little  use  of  a  national  history  that  is  not  a 
whit  less  providential,  although  it  does  not  glitter  with 
visible  miracles.  God  has  spoken  to  England  as  truly 
through  the  defeat  of  the  Spanish  Armada,  the  Puritan 
Wars,    and    the    Revolution,    as    ever    He    spoke    to 

*  LXX.     Ezra  ix.  6-15. 


298  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

Israel  by  means  of  the  Exodus,  the  Captivity,  and  the 
Return. 

The   arrangement  and   method  of  the  prayer  lend 
themselves  to  a  singularly  forcible  presentation  of  its 
main  topics,  with  heightening  effect  as  it  proceeds  in  a 
recapitulation  of  great  historical  landmarks.     It  opens 
with  an  outburst  of  praise  to  God.      In  saying  that 
Jehovah  is  God  alone,  it  makes  more  than  a  cold  pro- 
nouncement of  Jewish  monotheism ;    it   confesses    the 
practical  supremacy  of  God  over  His  universe,  and  there- 
fore over  His  people  and  their  enemies.    God  is  adored 
as  the  Creator  of  heaven  ;  and,  perhaps  with  an  allusion 
to  the  prevalent  Gentile  title  ''God  of  heaven,"  as  even 
the  Maker  of  the  heaven  of  heavens,  of  that  higher 
heaven  of  which  the  starry  firmament  is  but  the  gold- 
sprinkled  floor.     There,  in  those  far-off,  unseen  heights. 
He  is  adored.     But  earth  and  sea,  with  all  that  inhabit 
them,  are  also  God's  works.     From  the  highest  to  the 
lowest,  over  great  and  small.  He  reigns  supreme.    This 
.  glowing  expression  of  adoration  constitutes  a  suitable 
exordium.     It  is  right  and  fitting  that  we  should  ap- 
proach God   in  the  attitude  of  pure  worship,   for  the 
mioment  entirely  losing  ourselves  in  the  contemplation 
of  Him.     This  is  the  loftiest  act  of  prayer,  far  above 
the  selfish  shriek  for  help  in  dire  distress  to  which  un- 
spiritual  men  confine  their  utterance  before  God.     It  is 
also  the  most  enlightening  preparation  for  those  lower 
forms  of  devotion  that  cannot  be  neglected  so  long  as 
we  are  engaged  on  earth  with  our  personal  needs  and 
sins,  because  it  is  necessary  for  us  first  of  all  to  know 
what  God  is,  and  to  be  able  to  contemplate  the  thought 
of  His  being  and  nature,  if  we  would  understand  the 
course  of  His  action  among  men,  or  see  our  sins  in  the 
only  true  light — the  fight  of  His  countenance.      We 


Neh.  ix.]  THE  RELIGION  OF  HISTORY.  299 


can  best  trace  the  course  of  low- lying  valleys  from  a 
mountain  height.  The  primary  act  of  adoration  illu- 
mines and  directs  the  thanksgiving,  confession,  and 
petition  that  follow.  He  who  has  once  seen  God 
knows  how  to  look  at  the  world  and  his  own  heart, 
without  being  misled  by  earthly  glamour  or  personal 
prejudice. 

In  tracking  the  course  of  revelation  through  history, 
the  author  of  the  prayer  follows  two  threads.  First 
one  and  then  the  other  is  uppermost,  but  it  is  the  inter- 
weaving of  them  that  gives  the  definite  pattern  of  the 
w^hole  picture.  These  are  God's  grace  and  man's  sin. 
The  method  of  the  prayer  is  to  bring  them  into  view 
alternately,  as  they  are  illustrated  in  the  History  of 
Israel.  The  result  is  like  a  drama  of  several  acts,  and 
three  scenes  in  each  act.  Although  we  see  progress 
and  a  continuous  heightening  of  effect,  there  is  a 
startling  resemblance  between  the  successive  acts, 
and  the  relative  characters  of  the  scenes  remain  the 
same  throughout.  In  the  fn'st  scene  we  always  behold 
the  free  and  generous  favour  of  God  offered  to  the 
people  He  condescends  to  bless,  altogether  apart  from 
any  merits  or  claims  on  their  part.  In  the  second  we 
are  forced  to  look  at  the  ugly  picture  of  Israel's  ingrati- 
tude and  rebellion.  But  this  is  invariably  followed  by 
a  tJiird  scene,  which  depicts  the  wonderful  patience  and 
long-suffering  of  God,  and  His  active  aid  in  delivering 
His  guilty  people  from  the  troubles  they  have  brought 
on  their  own  heads  by  their  sins,  whenever  they  turn  to 
Him  in  penitence. 

The  recital  opens  where  the  Jews  delighted  to  trace 
their  origin,  in  Ur  of  the  Chaldees.  These  returned 
exiles  from  Babylon  'are  reminded  that  at  the  very 
dawn  of  their  ancestral  history  the  same  district  was  the 


300  EZRAy   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

Starting-point.  The  guiding  hand  of  God  was  seen  in 
bringing  up  the  Father  of  the  Nation  in  that  far-off 
tribal  migration  from  Chaldaea  to  Canaan.  At  first  the 
Divine  action  did  not  need  to  exhibit  all  the  traits  of 
grace  and  power  that  were  seen  later,  because  Abraham 
was  not  a  captive.  Then,  too,  there  was  no  rebellion, 
for  Abraham  was  faithful.  Thus  the  first  scene  opens 
with  the  mild  radiance  of  early  morning.  As  yet  there 
is  nothing  tragic  on  either  side.  The  chief  charac- 
teristic of  this  scene  is  its  promise,  and  the  author  of 
the  prayer  anticipates  some  of  the  later  scenes  by  in- 
terjecting a  grateful  recognition  of  the  faithfulness  of 
God  in  keeping  His  word.  ''  For  Thou  art  righteous," 
he  says.*  This  truth  is  the  keynote  to  the  prayer. 
The  thought  of  it  is  always  present  as  an  undertone, 
and  it  emerges  clearly  again  towards  the  conclusion, 
where,  however,  it  wears  a  very  different  garb.  There 
we  see  how  in  view  of  man's  sin  God's  righteousness 
inflicts  chastisement.  But  the  intention  of  the  author 
is  to  show  that  throughout  all  the  vicissitudes  of  his- 
tory God  holds  on  to  His  straight  line  of  righteousness, 
unwavering.  It  is  just  because  He  does  not  change 
that  His  action  must  be  modified  in  order  to  adjust 
itself  to  the  shifting  behaviour  of  men  and  women.  It 
is  the  very  immutability  of  God  that  requires  Him  to 
show  Himself  froward  with  the  froward,  although  He 
is  merciful  with  the  merciful. 

The  chief  events  of  the  Exodus  are  next  briefly  re- 
capitulated, in  order  to  enlarge  the  picture  of  God's 
early  goodness  to  Israel.  Here  we  may  discern  more 
than  promise ;  the  fulfilment  now  begins.  Here,  too, 
God    is    seen    in  that    specific    activity   of  deliverance 

*  Neh.  ix.  8. 


Neh.  ix.]  THE  RELIGION  OF  HISTORY.  301 

which  comes  more  and  more  to  the  front  as  the  history 
proceeds.  While  the  calamities  of  the  people  grow 
worse  and  worse,  God  reveals  Himself  with  ever-in- 
creasing force  as  the  Redeemer  of  Israel.  The  plagues 
of  Egypt,  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  the  drowning  of 
the  Egyptians,  the  cloud-pillar  by  day  and  the  pillar  of 
fire  by  night,  the  descent  on  Sinai  for  the  giving  of  The 
Law — in  which  connection  the  one  law  of  the  Sabbath  is 
singled  out,  a  point  to  be  noted  in  view  of  the  great 
prominence  given  to  it  later  on — the  manna,  and  the 
water  from  the  rock,  are  all  signs  and  proofs  of  God's 
exceeding  kindness  towards  His  people. 

But  now  we  are  directed  to  a  very  different  scene. 
In  spite  of  all  this  never-ceasing,  this  ever-accumulating 
goodness  of  God,  the  infatuated  people  rebel,  appoint  a 
captain  to  take  them  back  to  Egypt,  and  relapse  into 
idolatry.  This  is  the  human  side  of  the  history,  shown 
up  in  its  deep  blackness  against  the  luminous  splendour 
of  the  heavenly  background. 

Then  comes  the  marvellous  third  scene,  the  scene 
that  should  melt  the  hardest  heart.  God  does  not 
cast  off  His  people.  The  privileges  enumerated  before 
are  carefully  repeated,  to  show  that  God  has  not  with- 
drawn them.  Still  the  cloud-pillar  guides  by  day 
and  the  fire-pillar  by  night.  Still  the  manna  and  the 
water  are  supplied.  But  this  is  not  all.  Between 
these  two  pairs  of  favours  a  new  one  is  now  inserted. 
God  gives  His  "  good  Spirit  "  to  instruct  the  people. 
The  author  does  not  seem  to  be  referring  to  any  one 
specific  event,  as  that  of  the  Spirit  falling  on  the  elders, 
or  the  incident  of  the  unauthorised  prophet,  or  the 
bestowal  of  the  Spirit  on  the  artists  of  the  tabernacle. 
We  should  rather  conclude  from  the  generality  of  his 
terms  that  he  is  thinking  of  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  in  each 


302       EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

of  these  cases,  and  also  in  every  other  way  in  which  the 
Divine  Presence  was  felt  in  the  hearts  of  the  people. 
Prone  to  wander,  they  needed  and  they  received  this 
inward  monitor.  Thus  God  showed  His  great  for- 
bearance, by  even  extending  His  grace  and  giving 
more  help  because  the  need  was  greater. 

From  this  picture  of  the  Vv^ilderness  life  we  are 
led  on  to  the  conquest  of  the  Promised  Land.  The 
Israelites  overthrow  the  kings  east  of  the  Jordan,  and 
take  possession  of  their  territories.  Growing  in  num- 
bers, after  a  time  they  are  strong  enough  to  cross  the 
Jordan,  seize  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  subdue  the 
aboriginal  inhabitants.  Then  we  see  them  settling 
down  in  their  new  home  and  inheriting  the  products  ot 
the  labours  of  their  more  civilised  predecessors.  All 
this  is  a  further  proof  of  the  favour  of  God.  Yet 
again  the  dreadful  scene  of  ingratitude  is  repeated, 
and  that  in  an  aggravated  form.  A  wild  fury  of  re- 
bellion takes  hold  of  the  wicked  people.  They  rise 
up  against  their  God,  fling  His  Torah  behind  their 
backs,  murder  the  prophets  He  sends  to  warn  them, 
and  sink  down  into  the  greatest  wickedness.  The 
head  and  front  of  their  oflfence  is  the  rejection  of  the 
sacred  Torah.  The  word  Torah — law  or  instruction — 
must  here  be  taken  in  its  widest  sense  to  comprehend 
both  the  utterances  of  the  prophets  and  the  tradition  of 
the  priests,  although  it  is  represented  to  the  contem- 
poraries of  Ezra  by  its  crown  and  completion,  the 
Pentateuch.  In  this  second  act  of  heightened  energy 
on  both  sides,  while  the  characters  of  the  actors  are 
developing  with  stronger  features,  we  have  a  third 
scene — forgiveness  and  deliverance  from  God. 

Then  the  action  moves  more  rapidly.  It  becomes 
almost  confused.     In  general  terms,  with  a  few  swift 


Nch.  ix.]  THE  RELIGION   OF  HISTORY.  303 


Strokes,  the  author  sketches  a  succession  of  similar 
movements — indeed  he  does  little  more  than  hint  at 
them.  We  cannot  see  how  often  the  threefold  process 
was  repeated  ;  only  we  perceive  that  it  always  recurred 
in  the  same  form.  Yet  the  very  monotony  deepens  the 
impression  of  the  whole  drama — so  madly  persistent 
was  the  backsUding  habit  of  Israel,  so  grandly  continuous 
was  the  patient  long-suffering  of  God.  We  lose  all 
count  of  the  alternating  scenes  of  light  and  darkness 
as  we  look  at  them  down  the  long  vista  of  the  ages. 
And  yet  it  is  not  necessary  that  we  should  assort  them. 
The  perspective  may  escape  us  ;  all  the  more  must  we 
feel  the  force  of  the  process  which  is  characterised  by 
so  powerful  a  unity  of  movement. 

Coming  nearer  to  his  own  time,  the  author  of  the 
prayer  expands  into  detail  again.  While  the  kingdom 
lasted  God  did  not  cease  to  plead  with  His  people. 
They  disregarded  His  voice,  but  His  Spirit  was  in  the 
prophets,  and  the  long  line  of  heavenly  messengers  was 
a  living  testimony  to  the  Divine  forbearance.  Heed- 
less of  this  greatest  and  best  means  of  bringing  them 
back  to  their  forsaken  allegiance,  the  Jews  were  at 
length  given  over  to  the  heathen.  Yet  that  tremendous 
calamity  was  not  without  its  mitigations.  They  were 
not  utterly  consumed.  Even  now  God  did  not  forsake 
them.  He  followed  them  into  their  captivity.  This 
was  apparent  in  the  continuous  advent  of  prophets — 
such  as  the  Second  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel — who  appeared 
and  delivered  their  oracles  in  the  land  of  exile ;  it  was 
most  gloriously  manifest  in  the  return  under  Cyrus. 
Such  long-continued  goodness,  beyond  the  utmost 
excess  of  the  nation's  sin,  surpassed  all  that  could  have 
been  hoped  for.  It  went  beyond  the  promises  of  God  ; 
it  could  not  be  wholly  comprehended  in  His  faithfulness. 


304  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

Therefore  another  Divine  attribute  is  now  revealed.  At 
first  the  prayer  made  mention  of  God's  righteousness, 
which  was  seen  in  the  gift  of  Canaan  as  a  fulfilment  of 
the  promise  to  Abraham,  so  that  the  author  remarked, 
in  regard  to  the  performance  of  the  Divine  word,  *'  for 
Thou  art  righteous."  But  now  he  reflects  on  the  greater 
kindness,  the  uncovenanted  kindness  of  the  Exile  and 
the  Return ;  ^'  for  Thou  art  a  gracious  and  merciful 
God."  *  We  can  only  account  for  such  extended  good- 
ness by  ascribing  it  to  the  infinite  love  of  God. 

Having  thus  brought  his  review  down  to  his  own 
day,  in  the  concluding  passage  of  the  prayer  the  author 
appeals  to  God  with  reference  to  the  present  troubles 
of  His  people.  In  doing  so  he  first  returns  to  his 
contemplation  of  the  nature  of  God.  Three  Divine 
characteristics  rise  up  before  him, — first,  majesty  ("  the 
great,  the  mighty,  the  terrible  God ") ;  second,  fidelity 
(keeping  "  covenant ") ;  third,  compassion  (keeping 
*'  mercy  ").t  On  this  threefold  plea  he  beseeches  God 
that  all  the  national  trouble  which  has  been  endured 
since  the  first  Assyrian  invasion  may  not  ''  seem  little" 
to  Him.  The  greatness  of  God  might  appear  to  induce 
disregard  of  the  troubles  of  His  poor  human  children, 
and  yet  it  would  really  lead  to  the  opposite  result.  It 
is  only  the  limited  faculty  that  cannot  stoop  to  small 
things  because  its  attention  is  confined  to  large  affairs. 
Infinity  reaches  to  the  infinitely  little  as  readily  as  to 
the  infinitely  great.  With  the  appeal  for  compassion 
goes  a  confession  of  sin,  which  is  national  rather  than 
personal,  All  sections  of  the  community  on  which  the 
calamities  have  fallen — with  the  significant  exception 
of  the  prophets  who  had  possessed  God's  Spirit,  and 

*  Neh.  ix.  31.  f  Neh.  ix.  32. 


Neh.  ix.j  THE  RELIGION  OF  HISTORY.  305 

who  had  been  so  grievously  persecuted  by  their  fellow- 
countrymen — all  are  united  in  a  common  guilt.  The 
solidarity  of  the  Jewish  race  is  here  apparent.  We 
saw  in  the  earlier  case  of  the  sin-offering  that  the 
religion  of  Israel  was  national  rather  than  personal. 
The  punishment  of  the  captivity  was  a  national  dis- 
cipline ;  now  the  confession  is  for  national  sin.  And 
yet  the  sin  is  confessed  distributively,  with  regard  to 
the  several  sections  of  society.  We  cannot  feel  our 
national  sin  in  the  bulk.  It  must  be  brought  home  to 
us  in  our  several  walks  of  life. 

After  this  confession  the  prayer  deplores  the  present 
state  of  the  Jews.  No  reference  is  now  made  to  the 
temporary  annoyance  occasioned  by  the  attacks  of  the 
Samaritans.  The  building  of  the  walls  has  put  an  end 
to  that  nuisance.  But  the  permanent  evil  is  more 
deeply  rooted.  The  Jews  are  mournfully  conscious  of 
their  subject  state  beneath  the  Persian  yoke.  They 
have  returned  to  their  city  ;  but  they  are  no  more  free 
men  than  they  were  in  Babylon.  Like  th^  fellaheen  of 
Syria  to-day,  they  have  to  pay  heavy  tribute,  which 
takes  the  best  of  the  produce  of  their  labour.  They  are 
subject  to  the  conscription,  having  to  serve  in  the  armies 
of  the  Great  King — Herodotus  tells  us  that  there  were 
"  Syrians  of  Palestine  "  in  the  army  of  Xerxes.*  Their 
cattle  are  seized  by  the  officers  of  the  government, 
arbitrarily,  *' at  their  pleasure."  Did  Nehemiah  know 
of  this  complaint  ?  If  so,  might  there  not  be  some 
ground  for  the  suspicion  of  the  informers  after  all  ? 
Was  that  suspicion  one  reason  for  his  recall  to  Susa  ? 
We  cannot  answer  these  questions.  As  to  the  prayer, 
this  leaves  the  whole  case  with  God.     It  would  have 


*   Herodotus,  vii.  89. 

20 


3o6  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

been  dangerous  to  have  said  more  in  the  hearing  of  the 
spies  who  haunted  the  streets  of  Jerusalem.  And  it 
was  needless.  It  is  not  the  business  of  prayer  to  try- 
to  move  the  hand  of  God.  It  is  enough  that  we  lay 
bare  our  state  before  Him,  trusting  His  wisdom  as  well 
as  His  grace — not  dictating  to  God,  but  confiding  in 
Him. 


CHAPTER   XXVII. 

THE   COVENANT. 
Nehemiah  X. 

THE  tenth  chapter  of  **  Nehemiah  "  introduces  us 
to  one  of  the  most  vital  crises  in  the  History  of 
Israel.  It  sho\\^  us  how  the  secret  cult  of  the  priests 
of  Jehovah  became  a  popular  religion.  The  process 
was  brought  to  a  focus  in  the  public  reading  of  The 
Law ;  it  was  completed  in  the  acceptance  of  The  Law 
which  the  sealing  of  the  covenant  ratified.  This  event 
may  be  compared  with  the  earlier  scene,  when  the  law- 
book discovered  in  the  temple  by  Hilkiah  was  accepted 
and  enforced  by  Josiah.  Undoubtedly  that  book  is 
included  in  Ezra's  complete  edition  of  The  Law. 
Generations  before  Ezra,  then,  though  nothing  more 
than  Deuteronomy  may  have  been  forthcoming,  that 
vital  section  of  The  Law,  containing  as  it  did  the 
essential  principles  of  Judaism,  was  adopted.  But  how 
was  this  result  brought  about  ?  Not  by  the  intelligent 
conviction,  nor  by  the  voluntary  action  of  the  nation. 
It  was  the  work  of  a  king,  who  thought  to  drive  his 
ideas  into  his  subjects.  No  doubt  Josiah  acted  in  a 
spirit  of  genuine  loyalty  to  Jehovah ;  and  yet  the 
method  he  followed  could  not  lead  to  success.  The 
transient  character  of  his  spasmodic  attempt  to  save 
his  people  at  the  eleventh  hour,  followed  by  the  total 


3o8  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

collapse  of  the  fabric  he  had  built  up,  shows  how 
insecure  a  foundation  he  had  obtained.  It  was  a  royal 
reformation,  not  a  revival  of  religion  on  the  part  of  the 
nation.  We  have  an  instance  of  a  similar  course  of 
action  in  the  English  reformation  under  Edward  VI., 
which  was  swept  away  in  a  moment  when  his  Catholic 
sister  succeeded  to  the  throne,  because  it  was  a  move- 
ment originating  in  the  court  and  not  supported  by  the 
country,  as  was  that  under  Elizabeth  when  Mary  had 
opened  the  eyes  of  the  English  nation  to  the  character 
of  Romanism. 

But  now  a  very  different  scene  presents  itself  to  our 
notice.  The  sealing  of  the  covenant  signifies  the 
voluntary  acceptance  of  The  Law  by  the  people  of 
Israel,  and  their  solemn  promise  to  submit  to  its  yoke. 
There  are  two  sides  to  this  covenant  arrangement. 
The  first  is  seen  in  the  conduct  of  the  people  in  enter- 
ing into  the  covenant.  This  is  absolutely  an  act  of 
free  will  on  their  part.  We  have  seen  that  Ezra  never 
attempted  to  force  The  Law  upon  his  fellow-countrymen 
— that  he  was  slow  in  producing  it ;  that  when  he  read 
it  he  only  did  so  at  the  urgent  request  of  the  people  ; 
and  that  even  after  this  he  went  no  further,  but  left  it 
with  the  audience  for  them  to  do  with  it  as  they  thought 
fit.  It  came  with  the  authority  of  the  will  of  God, 
which  to  religious  men  is  the  highest  authority ;  but  it 
was  not  backed  by  the  secular  arm,  even  though  Ezra 
possessed  2i  firman  from  the  Persian  court  which  would 
have  justified  him  in  calling  in  the  aid  of  the  civil 
government.  Now  the  acceptance  of  The  Law  is  to  be 
in  the  same  spirit  of  freedom.  Of  course  somebody 
must  have  started  the  idea  of  forming  a  covenant. 
Possibly  it  was  Nehemiah  who  did  so.  Still  this  was 
when  the  people  were  ripe  for  entering  into  it,  and  the 


Neh.  X.]  THE   COVENANT.  309 

whole  process  was  voluntary  on  their  part.  The  only 
religion  that  can  be  real  to  us  is  that  which  we  believe 
in  with  personal  faith  and  surrender  ourselves  to  with 
willing  obedience.  Even  when  the  law  is  recorded  on 
parchment,  it  must  also  be  written  on  the  fleshy  table 
of  the  heart  if  it  is  to  be  effective. 

But  there  is  another  side  to  the  covenant-sealing. 
The  very  existence  of  a  covenant  is  significant.  The 
word  "  covenant "  suggests  an  agreement  between  two 
parties,  a  mutual  arrangement  to  which  each  is  pledged. 
So  profound  was  the  conviction  of  Israel  that  in  coming 
to  an  agreement  with  God  it  was  not  possible  for  man 
to  bargain  with  his  Maker  on  equal  terms,  that  in 
translating  the  Hebrew  name  for  covenant  into  Greek 
the  writers  of  the  Septuagint  did  not  use  the  term  that 
elsewhere  stands  for  an  agreement  among  equals 
(ctvvOjjkt]),  but  employed  one  indicative  of  an  arrange- 
ment made  by  one  party  to  the  transaction  and  sub- 
mitted to  the  other  (hiaOi^Kri).  The  covenant,  then,  is  a 
Divine  disposition,  a  Divine  ordinance.  Even  when,  as 
in  the  present  instance,  it  is  formally  made  by  men,  this 
is  still  on  lines  laid  down  by  God  ;  the  covenanting  is  a 
voluntary  act  of  adhesion  to  a  law  which  comes  from  God. 
Therefore  the  terms  of  the  covenant  are  fixed,  and  not 
to  be  discussed  by  the  signatories.  This  is  of  the  very 
essence  of  Judaism  as  a  religion  of  Divine  law.  Then 
though  the  sealing  is  voluntary,  it  entails  a  great  obliga- 
tion ;  henceforth  the  covenant  people  are  bound  by  the 
covenant  which  they  have  deliberately  entered  into. 
This,  too,  is  a  characteristic  of  the  religion  of  law. 
It  is  a  bondage,  though  a  bondage  willingly  submitted 
to  by  those .  who  stoop  to  its  yoke.  To  St.  Paul  it 
became  a  crushing  slavery.  But  the  burden  was  not  felt 
at  first,  simply  because  neither  the  range  of  The  Law^ 


3IO  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

nor  the  searching  force  of  its  requirements,  nor  the 
weakness  of  men  to  keep  their  vows,  was  yet  per- 
ceived by  the  sanguine  Jev/s  who  so  unhesitatingly 
surrendered  to  it.  As  we  look  back  to  their  position 
from  the  vantage  ground  of  Christian  liberty,  we  are 
astounded  at  the  Jewish  love  of  law,  and  we  rejoice 
in  our  freedom  from  its  irksome  restraints.  And  yet 
the  Christian  is  not  an  antinomian  ;  he  is  not  a  sort 
of  free  lance,  sworn  to  no  obedience.  He  too  has  his 
obligation.  He  is  bound  to  a  lofty  service — not  to  a  law, 
indeed,  but  to  a  personal  Master  ;  not  in  the  servitude  of 
the  letter,  but,  though  with  the  freedom  of  the  spirit, 
really  with  far  higher  obligations  of  love  and  fidelity 
than  were  ever  recognised  by  the  most  rigorous  cove- 
nant-keeping Jews.  Thus  he  has  a  new  covenant, 
sealed  in  the  blood  of  his  Saviour ;  and  his  communion 
with  his  Lord  implies  a  sacramental  vow  of  loyalty. 
The  Christian  covenant,  however,  is  not  visibly  ex- 
hibited, because  a  formal  pledge  is  scarcely  in  accord- 
ance with  the  spirit  of  the  gospel.  We  find  it  better 
to  take  a  more  self-distrustful  course,  one  marked  by 
greater  dependence  of  faith  on  the  preserving  grace  of 
God,  by  turning  our  vows  into  prayers.  While  the  Jews 
"  entered  into  a  curse  and  into  an  oath  "  to  keep  the  law, 
we  shrink  from  anything  so  terrible  ;  yet  our  duty  is  not 
the  less  because  we  limit  our  professions  of  it. 

The  Jews  were  prepared  for  their  covenant  by  two 
essential  preliminaries.  The  first  was  knowledge.  The 
reading  of  The  Law  preceded  the  covenant,  which  was 
entered  into  intelligently.  There  is  no  idea  of  what 
is  called  "  implicit  faith."  The  whole  situation  is 
clearly  surveyed,  and  The  Law  is  adopted  with  a  con- 
sciousness of  what  it  means  as  far  as  the  understanding 
of  its  requirements  by  the  people  will  yet  penetrate  into 


Nch.  X.J  THE   COVENANT.  311 


its  signification.  It  is  necessary  to  count  the  cost  before 
entering  on  a  course  of  religious  service.  With  a  view 
to  this  our  Lord  spoke  of  the  "  narrow  way  "  and  the 
"  cross,"  much  to  the  disappointment  of  His  more 
sanguine  disciples,  but  as  a  real  security  for  genuine 
loyalty.  With  religion,  of  all  things,  it  is  foolish  to  take 
a  leap  in  the  dark.  Judaism  and  Christianity  absolutely 
contradict  the  idea  that  "  Ignorance  is  the  mother  of 
devotion." 

The  second  preparation  consisted  in  the  moral  effect 
on  the  Jews  of  the  review  of  their  history  in  the  light 
of  religion,  and  their  consequent  confession  of  sin  and 
acknowledgment  of  God's  goodness.  Here  was  the 
justification  for  the  written  law.  The  old  methods  had 
failed.  The  people  had  not  kept  the  desultory  Torah 
of  the  prophets.  They  needed  a  more  formal  system 
of  discipline.  Here  too  were  the  motives  for  adopting 
the  covenant.  Penitence  for  the  nation's  miserable  past 
prompted  the  desire  for  a  better  future,  and  gratitude 
for  the  overwhelming  goodness  of  God  roused  an  en- 
thusiasm of  devotion.  Nothing  urges  us  to  surrender 
ourselves  to  God  so  much  as  these  two  motives — our 
repentance  and  His  goodness.  They  are  the  two 
powerful  magnets  that  draw  souls  to  Christ. 

The  chronicler — always  delighting  in  any  opportunity 
to  insert  his  lists  of  names — records  the  names  of  the 
signatories  of  the  covenant.  The  seals  of  these  men 
were  of  importance  so  long  as  the  original  document  to 
which  they  were  affixed  was  preserved,  and  so  long  as 
any  recognised  descendants  of  the  families  they  repre- 
sented were  living.  To  us  they  are  of  interest  because 
they  indicate  the  orderly  arrangement  of  the  nation  and 
the  thoroughness  of  procedure  in  the  ratification  of  the 
covenant.       Nehemiah,    who    is    again    called    by    his 


EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


Persian  title  Tirshatha,  appears  first.  This  fact  is 
to  be  noted  as  a  sign  that  as  yet  even  in  a  reli- 
gious document  the  civil  ruler  takes  precedence  of  the 
hierarchy.  At  present  it  is  allowed  for  a  layman  to 
head  the  list  of  leading  Israelites.  We  might  have 
looked  for  Ezra's  name  in  the  first  place,  for  he  it  was 
who  had  taken  the  lead  in  the  introduction  of  The  Law, 
while  Nehemiah  had  retreated  into  the  background 
during  the  whole  month's  proceedings.  But  the  name 
of  Ezra  does  not  appear  anywhere  on  the  document. 
The  probable  explanation  of  its  absence  is  that  only 
heads  of  houses  affixed  their  seals,  and  that  Ezra  was 
not  accounted  one  of  them.  Nehemiah's  position  in  the 
document  is  official.  The  next  name,  Zedekiah,  possibly 
stands  for  Zadok  the  Scribe  mentioned  later,*  who 
may  have  been  the  writer  of  the  document,  or  perhaps 
Nehemiah's  secretary.  Then  come  the  priests.  It  was 
not  the  business  of  these  men  to  assist  in  the  reading  of 
The  Law.  While  the  Levites  acted  as  scribes  and  in- 
structors of  the  people,  the  priests  were  chiefly  occupied 
with  the  temple  ritual  and  the  performance  of  the  other 
ceremonies  of  religion.  The  Levites  were  teachers  of 
The  Law ;  the  priests  were  its  administrators.  In  the 
question  of  the  execution  of  The  Law,  therefore,  the 
priests  have  a  prominent  place,  and  after  remaining  in 
obscurity  during  the  previous  engagements,  they  natur- 
ally come  to  the  front  when  the  national  acceptance  of 
the  Pentateuch  is  being  confirmed.  The  hierarchy  is  so 
far  established  that,  though  the  priests  follow  the  lay 
ruler  of  Jerusalem,  they  precede  the  general  body  of 
citizens,  and  even  the  nobility.  No  doubt  many  of  the 
higher  families  were  in  the  line  of  the  priesthood.     But 


Neh.  xiii.  13. 


Nch.  X.]  THE   COVENANT.  313 


this  was  not  the  case  with  all  of  them,  and  therefore  we 
must  see  here  a  distinct  clerical  precedence  over  all  but 
the  very  highest  rank. 

Most  of  the  names  in  this  list  of  priests  occur  again 
in  a  list  of  those  who  came  up  with  Zerubbabel  and 
Jeshua,*  from  which  fact  we  must  infer  that  they 
represent  families,  not  individuals.  But  some  of  the 
names  in  the  other  list  are  missing  here.  A  most 
significant  omission  is  that  of  the  high-priest.  Are  we 
merely  to  suppose  that  some  names  have  dropped  out 
in  course  of  transcription  ?  Or  was  the  high-priest, 
with  some  of  his  brethren,  unwilling  to  sign  the 
covenant  ?  We  have  had  earlier  signs  that  the  high- 
priest  did  not  enjoy  the  full  confidence  of  Ezra.f  The 
heads  of  the  hierarchy  may  have  resented  the  popular- 
ising of  The  Law.  Since  formerly,  while  the  people 
were  often  favoured  with  the  moral  Torah  of  the 
prophets,  the  ceremonial  Torah  of  the  priests  was  kept 
among  the  arcana  of  the  initiated,  the  change  may  not 
have  been  pleasing  to  its  old  custodians.  Then  these 
conservatives  may  not  have  approved  of  Ezra's  latest 
recension  of  The  Law.  A  much  more  serious  difficulty 
lay  with  those  priests  who  had  contracted  foreign 
marriages,  and  who  had  favoured  the  policy  of  alliance 
with  neighbouring  peoples  which  Ezra  had  so  fiercely 
opposed.  Old  animosities  from  this  source  were  still 
smouldering  in  the  bosoms  of  some  of  the  priests.  But 
apart  from  any  specific  grounds  of  disaffection,  it  is 
clear  that  there  never  was  much  sympathy  between  the 
scribes  and  the  priests.  Putting  all  these  considera- 
tions together,  it  is  scarcely  too  much  to  conjecture 
that  the  absentees  were  designedly  holding  back  when 

*  Neh.  xii.  1-7. 

t  E.g.^  Ezra  viii.  2^}^  ;  where  the  liigh-priest  is  passed  over  in  silence. 


314  EZRA    NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

the  covenant  was  signed.  The  only  wonder  is  that  the 
disaffected  minority  was  so  small. 

According  to  the  new  order  advised  by  Ezekiel  and 
now  established,  the  Levites  take  the  second  place  and 
come  after  the  priests,  as  a  separate  and  inferior  order 
of  clergy.  Yet  the  hierarchy  is  so  far  honoured  that 
even  the  lowest  of  the  clergy  precede  the  general  body 
of  the  laity.  We  come  down  to  the  porters,  the 
choristers,  and  the  temple-helots  before  we  hear  of  the 
mass  of  the  people.  When  this  lay  element  is  reached, 
the  whole  of  it  is  included.  Men,  women,  and  children 
are  all  represented  in  the  covenant.  The  Law  had  been 
read  to  all  classes,  and  now  it  is  accepted  by  all  classes. 
Thus  again  the  rights  and  duties  of  women  and  children 
in  religion  are  recognised,  and  the  thoroughly  domestic 
character  of  Judaism  is  provided  for.  There  is  a  solidity 
in  the  compact.  A  common  obligation  draws  all  who 
are  included  in  it  together.  The  population  generally 
follows  the  example  of  the  leaders.  ''They  clave  to 
their  brethren,  their  nobles,"*  says  the  chronicler.  The 
most  effective  unifying  influence  is  a  common  enthusiasm 
in  a  great  cause.  The  unity  of  Christendom  will  only 
be  restored  when  the  passion  of  loyalty  to  Christ  is 
supreme  in  every  Christian,  and  when  every  Christian 
acknowledges  that  this  is  the  case  with  all  his  brother- 
Christians. 

It  is  clear  that  the  obligation  of  the  covenant  extended 
to  the  whole  law.  This  is  called  "  God's  law,  which  was 
given  by  Moses  the  servant  of  God."t  Nothing  can  be 
clearer  than  that  in  the  eyes  of  the  chronicler,  at  all 
events,  it  was  the  Mosaic  law.  We  have  seen  many 
indications  of  this  view  in    the   chronicler's  narrative. 

*  Neh.  X.  29.  t  Ibid. 


Neh.  X.]  THE   COVENANT.  315 

Can  we  resist  the  conclusion  that  it  was  held  by  the 
contemporaries  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  ?  We  are  re- 
peatedly warned  against  the  mistake  of  supposing  that 
the  Pentateuch  was  accepted  as  a  brand-new  document. 
On  the  contrary,  it  was  certainly  received  on  the 
authority  of  the  Mosaic  origin  of  its  contents,  and 
because  of  the  Divine  authority  that  accompanied  this 
origin.  By  the  Jews  it  was  viewed  as  the  law  of 
Moses,  just  as  in  Roman  jurisprudence  every  law  was 
considered  to  be  derived  from  the  '*  Twelve  Tables." 
No  doubt  Ezra  also  considered  it  to  be  a  true  inter- 
pretation of  the  genius  of  Mosaism  adapted  to  modern 
requirements.  If  we  keep  this  clearly  before  our  minds, 
the  Pentateuchal  controversy  will  lose  its  sharpest  points 
of  conflict.  The  truth  here  noted  once  more  is  so  often 
disregarded  that  it  needs  to  be  repeatedly  insisted  on  at 
the  risk  of  tautology. 

After  the  general  acceptance  of  the  whole  law,  the 
covenant  specifies  certain  important  details.  First 
comes  the  separation  from  the  heathen — the  burning 
question  of  the  day.  Next  we  have  Sabbath  observance 
— also  made  especially  important,  because  it  was  dis- 
tinctive of  Judaism  as  well  as  needful  for  the  relief  of 
poor  and  oppressed  labourers.  But  the  principal  part  of 
the  schedule  is  occupied  with  pledges  for  the  provision 
of  the  temple  services.  Immense  supplies  of  fuel  would 
be  required  for  the  numerous  sacrifices,  and  therefore 
considerable  prominence  was  given  to  the  collecting 
of  wood  ;  subsequently  a  festival  was  established  to 
celebrate  this  action.  According  to  a  later  tradition, 
Nehemiah  kindled  the  flames  on  the  great  altar  of 
the  burnt-offerings  with  supernatural  fire.*     Like  the 

*  2  Mace.  i.  19-22. 


3i6  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

Vestal  virgins  at  Rome,  the  temple  officials  were  to 
tend  the  sacred  fire  as  a  high  duty,  and  never  let  it 
go  out.  "  Fire  shall  be  kept  burning  upon  the  altar 
continually,"  *  was  the  Levitical  rule.  Thus  the  very 
greatest  honour  was  given  to  the  rite  of  sacrifice.  As 
the  restoration  of  the  religion  of  Israel  began  with  the 
erection  of  the  altar  before  the  temple  was  built,  so  the 
preservation  of  that  religion  was  centred  in  the  altar 
fire — and  so,  we  may  add,  its  completion  was  attained 
in  the  supreme  sacrifice  of  Christ. 

Finally,  special  care  was  taken  for  what  we  may  call 
"  Church  finance  "  in  the  collection  of  the  tithes.  This 
comes  last ;  yet  it  has  its  place.  Not  only  is  it  necessary 
for  the  sake  of  the  work  that  is  to  be  carried  on  ;  it  is 
also  important  in  regard  to  the  religious  obligation 
of  the  worshipper.  The  cry  for  a  cheap  religion  is 
irreligious,  because  real  religion  demands  sacrifices, 
and,  indeed,  necessarily  promotes  the  liberal  spirit 
from  which  those  sacrifices  flow.  But  if  the  contri- 
butions are  to  come  within  the  range  of  religious  duties, 
they  must  be  voluntary.  Clearly  this  was  the  case 
with  the  Jewish  tithes,  as  we  may  see  for  two  reasons. 
First,  they  were  included  in  the  covenant  ;  and  adhesion 
to  this  was  entirely  voluntary.  Secondly,  Malachi  re- 
buked the  Jews  for  withholding  the  payment  of  tithes 
as  a  sin  against  God,t  showing  that  the  payment  only 
rested  on  a  sense  of  moral  obligation  on  the  part  of  the 
people.  It  would  have  been  difficult  to  go  further  while 
a  foreign  government  was  in  power,  even  if  the  religious 
leaders  had  desired  to  do  so.  Moreover,  God  can  only 
accept  the  offerings  that  are  given  freely  with  heart  and 
will,  for  all  He  cares  for  is  the  spirit  of  the  gift. 

*  Lev.  vi.  13.  t  ^1^1-  iii-  8-12. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

THE  HOLY   CITY. 
Nehemiah    vii.    1-4;    xi. 

WE  have  seen  that  though  the  two  passages  that 
deal  with  the  sparsity  of  the  population  of 
Jerusalem  are  separated  in  our  Bibles  by  the  insertion 
of  the  section  on  the  reading  of  The  Law  and  the 
formation  of  the  covenant,  they  are,  in  fact,  so  closely 
related  that,  if  we  skip  the  intermediate  section,  the 
one  runs  on  into  the  other  quite  smoothly,  as  by  a 
continuous  narrative ;  *  that  is  to  say,  we  may  pass 
from  Nehemiah  vii.  4  to  Nehemiah  xi.  I  without  the 
slightest  sign  of  a  junction  of  separate  paragraphs.  So 
naive  and  crude  is  the  chronicler's  style,  that  he  has 
left  the  raw  edges  of  the  narrative  jagged  and  un- 
trimmed,  and  thereby  he  has  helped  us  to  see  distinctly 
how  he  has  constructed  his  work.  The  foreign  matter 
which  he  has  inserted  in  the  great  gash  is  quite 
different  in  style  and  contents  from  that  which  pre- 
cedes and  follows  it.  This  is  marked  with  the  Ezra 
stamp,  which  indicates  that  in  all  probability  it  is 
founded  on  notes  left  by  the  scribe  ;  but  the  broken 
narrative  in  the  midst  of  which  it  appears  is  derived 
from  Nehemiah,  the    first  part  consisting  of  memoirs 


*  Pages  271-273. 
317 


3i8  EZRA,  N EH  EMI  AH,   AND  ESTHER. 

written  by  the  statesman  himself,  and  the  second 
part  being  an  abbreviation  of  the  continuation  of 
Nehemiah's  writing.  The  beginning  of  this  second 
part  directly  links  it  on  to  the  first  part,  for  the  word 
"  and  "  has  no  sort  of  connection  with  the  immediately 
preceding  Ezra  section,  while  it  exactly  fits  into  the 
broken  end  of  the  previous  Nehemiah  section  ;  only 
with  his  characteristic  indifference  to  secular  affairs,  in 
comparison  with  matters  touching  The  Law  and  the 
temple  worship,  the  chronicler  abbreviates  the  con- 
clusion of  Nehemiah's  story.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  he 
constructs  his  book  in  this  place.  He  has  before  him 
two  documents — one  written  by  Nehemiah,  the  other 
written  either  by  Ezra  or  by  one  of  his  close  associates. 
At  first  he  follows  Nehemiah,  but  suddenly  he  dis- 
covers that  he  has  reached  the  date  when  the  Ezra 
record  should  come  in.  Therefore,  without  any  con- 
cern for  the  irregularity  of  style  that  he  is  perpet- 
rating, he  suddenly  breaks  off  Nehemiah's  narrative 
to  insert  the  Ezra  material,  at  the  end  of  which  he 
simply  goes  back  to  the  Nehemiah  document,  and 
resumes  it  exactly  where  he  has  left  it,  except  that  now, 
after  introducing  it  in  the  language  of  the  original 
writer,  he  compresses  the  fragment,  so  that  the  com- 
position passes  over  into  the  third  person.  It  is  not  to 
be  supposed  that  this  is  done  arbitrarily  or  for  no  good 
reason.  The  chronicler  here  intends  to  tell  his  story 
in  chronological  order.  He  shov.'s  that  the  course 
of  events  referred  to  at  the  opening  of  the  seventh 
chapter  really  was  broken  by  the  occurrences  the  record 
of  which  then  follows.  The  interruptions  in  the  narra- 
tive just  correspond  to  the  real  interruptions  in  the 
historical  facts.  History  is  not  a  smooth-flowing  river  ; 
its   course  is  repeatedly  broken  by  rocks  and  shoals. 


Nrh.  vii.  i-4;xi.]  THE  HOLY  CITY.  >  319 


and  sometimes  entirely  deflected  by  impassable  cliffs. 
In  the  earlier  part  of  the  narrative  we  read  of  Nehe- 
miah's  anxiety  on  account  of  the  sparsity  of  the  popu- 
lation of  Jerusalem  ;  but  before  he  was  able  to  carry 
out  any  plans  for  the  increase  of  the  number  of  in- 
habitants the  time  of  the  great  autumn  festivals  was 
upon  him,  and  the  people  were  eager  to  take  advantage 
of  the  pubHc  holidays  that  then  fell  due  in  order  to  in- 
duce Ezra  to  read  to  them  the  wonderful  book  he  had 
brought  up  from  Babylon  years  before,  and  of  which 
he  had  not  yet  divulged  the  contents.  This  was  not 
waste  time  as  regards  Nehemiah's  project.  Though 
the  civil  governor  stood  in  the  background  during  the 
course  of  the  great  religious  movement,  he  heartily 
seconded  the  clerical  leaders  of  it  in  their  efforts  to  en- 
lighten and  encourage  the  people,  and  he  was  the  first 
to  seal  the  covenant  which  was  its  fruit.  Then  the 
people  who  had  been  instructed  in  the  principles  of 
their  faith  and  consecrated  to  its  lofty  requirements 
were  fitted  to  take  their  places  as  citizens  of  the  Holy 
City. 

The  '*  population  question  "  which  troubled  Nehemiah 
at  this  time  is  so  exactly  opposite  to  that  which  gives 
concern  to  students  of  social  problems  in  our  own  day, 
that  we  need  to  look  into  the  circumstances  in  which 
it  emerged  in  order  to  understand  its  bearings.  The 
powerful  suction  of  great  towns,  depleting  the  rural 
districts  and  gorging  the  urban,  is  a  source  of  the 
greatest  anxiety  to  all  who  seriously  contemplate  the 
state  of  modern  society  ;  and  consequently  one  of  the 
most  pressing  questions  of  the  day  is  how  to  scatter 
the  people  over  the  land.  Even  in  new  countries  the 
same  serious  condition  is  experienced — in  Australia, 
for    instance,    where  the  crowding   of  the  people   into 


320  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

Melbourne  is  rapidly  piling  up  the  very  difficulties 
sanguine  men  hoped  the  colonies  would  escape.  If  we 
only  had  these  modern  facts  to  draw  upon,  we  might 
conclude  that  a  centripetal  movement  of  population  was 
inevitable.  That  it  is  not  altogether  a  novelty  we  may 
learn  from  the  venerable  story  of  the  Tower  of  Babel, 
from  which  we  may  also  gather  that  it  is  God's  will 
that  men  should  spread  abroad  and  replenish  the 
earth. 

It  is  one  of  the  advantages  of  the  study  of  history 
that  it  lifts  us  out  of  our  narrow  grooves  and  reveals  to 
us  an  immense  variety  of  modes  of  life,  and  this  is  not 
the  least  of  the  many  elements  of  profit  that  come  to 
us  from  the  historical  embodiment  of  revelation  as  we 
have  it  in  the  Bible.  The  width  of  vision  that  we  may 
thus  attain  to  will  have  a  double  effect.  It  will  save 
us  from  being  wedded  to  a  fixed  pohcy  under  all  cir- 
cumstances ;  and  it  will  deliver  us  from  the  despair 
into  which  we  should  settle  down,  if  we  did  not  see 
that  what  looks  to  us  Uke  a  hopeless  and  interminable 
drift  in  the  wrong  direction  is  not  the  permanent 
course  of  human  development.  It  is  necessary  to  con- 
sider that  if  the  dangers  of  a  growing  population  are 
serious,  those  of  a  dwindling  population  are  much 
more  grave. 

Nehemiah  was  in  a  position  to  see  the  positive  ad- 
vantages of  city  life,  and  he  regarded  it  as  his  business 
to  make  the  most  of  them  for  the  benefit  of  his  fellow- 
countrymen.  We  have  seen  that  each  of  the  three  great 
expeditions  from  Babylon  up  to  Jerusalem  had  its 
separate  and  distinctive  purpose.  The  aim  of  the  first, 
under  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua,  was  the  rebuilding  of  the 
temple ;  the  object  of  the  second,  under  Ezra,  was  the 
establishment  of  The  Law;  and  the  end  of  the  third, 


Neh.  vii.  i-4;xi.]  THE  HOLY  CITY.  321 


under  Nehemiah,  was  the  fortification  and  strengthening 
of  the  city.  This  end  was  before  the  patriotic  states- 
man's mind  from  the  very  first  moment  when  he  was 
startled  and  grieved  at  hearing  the  report  of  the  ruinous 
condition  of  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  which  his  brother 
brought  to  him  in  the  palace  at  Susa.  We  may  be 
sure  that  with  so  practical  a  man  it  was  more  than 
a  sentimental  reverence  for  venerated  sites  that  led 
Nehemiah  to  undertake  the  great  work  of  fortifying  the 
city  of  his  fathers'  sepulchres.  He  had  something  else 
in  view  than  to  construct  a  huge  mausoleum.  His 
aim  had  too  much  to  do  with  the  living  present  to 
resemble  that  of  Rizpah  guarding  the  corpses  of  her 
sons  from  the  hovering  vultures.  Nehemiah  believed 
in  the  future  of  Jerusalem,  and  therefore  he  would  not 
permit  her  to  remain  a  city  of  ruins,  unguarded,  and  a 
prey  to  every  chance  comer.  He  saw  that  she  had  a 
great  destiny  yet  to  fulfil,  and  that  she  must  be  made 
strong  if  ever  she  was  to  accomplish  it.  It  is  to  the 
credit  of  his  keen  discernment  that  he  perceived  this 
essential  condition  of  the  firm  establishment  of  Israel 
as  a  distinctive  people  in  the  land  of  Palestine.  Ezra 
was  too  literary,  too  abstract,  too  much  of  an  ideaHst 
to  see  it,  and  therefore  he  struggled  on  with  his  teaching 
and  exhorting  till  he  was  simply  silenced  by  the  un- 
looked-for logic  of  facts.  Nehemiah  perfectly  com- 
prehended this  logic,  and  knew  how  to  turn  it  to  the 
advantage  of  his  own  cause. 

The  fierce  antagonism  of  the  Samaritans  is  an  in- 
direct confirmation  of  the  wisdom  of  Nehemiah's  plans. 
Sanballat  and  his  associates  saw  clearly  enough  that, 
if  Jerusalem  were  to  become  strong  again,  the  metro- 
politan pre-eminence— which  had  shifted  from  this  city 
to    Samaria    after    the    Babylonian    conquest — would 

21 


322  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


revert  to  its  old  seat  among  the  hills  of  Judah  and 
Benjamin.  Now  this  pre-eminence  was  of  vital  im- 
portance to  the  destinies  of  Israel.  It  was  not  possible 
for  the  people  in  those  early  days  to  remain  separate 
and  compact,  and  to  work  out  their  own  peculiar 
mission,  without  a  strong  and  safe  centre.  We  have 
seen  Judaism  blossoming  again  as  a  distinctive  pheno- 
menon in  the  later  history  of  the  Jews,  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans.  But  this 
most  wonderful  fact  in  ethnology  is  indirectly  due  to 
the  work  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah.  The  readiness  to 
intermarry  with  foreigners  shown  by  the  contemporaries 
of  the  two  great  reformers  proves  conclusively  that, 
unless  the  most  stringent  measures  had  been  taken  for 
the  preservation  of  its  distinctive  life,  Israel  would  have 
melted  away  into  the  general  mass  of  amalgamated 
races  that  made  up  the  Chaldaean  and  Persian  empires. 
The  military  protection  of  Jerusalem  enabled  her 
citizens  to  maintain  an  independent  position  in  de- 
fiance of  the  hostile  criticism  of  her  neighbours,  and 
the  civil  importance  of  the  city  helped  to  give  moral 
weight  to  her  example  in  the  eyes  of  the  scattered 
Jewish  population  outside  her  walls.  Then  the  wor- 
ship at  the  temple  was  a  vital  element  in  the  newly 
modelled  religious  organisation,  and  it  was  absolutely 
essential  that  this  should  be  placed  beyond  the  danger 
of  being  tampered  with  by  foreign  influences,  and  at 
the  same  time  that  it  should  be  adequately  supported  by 
a  sufticent  number  of  resident  Jews.  Something  Hke 
the  motive  that  induces  the  Pope  to  desire  the  restora- 
tion of  the  temporal  power  of  the  Papacy — perfectly 
wise  and  reasonable  from  his  point  of  view — would 
urge  the  leaders  of  Judaism  to  secure  as  far  as  possible 
the  political  independence  of  the  centre  of  their  religion, 


Nell.  vH.  1-4  ;xi.]  THE  HOLY  CITY.  323 


It  is  to  be  observed  that  Nehemiah  desired  an 
increase  of  the  population  for  the  immediate  purpose  of 
strengthening  the  garrison  of  Jerusalem.  The  city  had 
beenhttle  better  than  ''a  lodge  in  a  garden  of  cucumbers" 
till  her  new  governor  had  put  forth  stupendous  efforts 
which  resulted  in  converting  her  into  a  fortress.  Now 
the  fortress  required  to  be  manned.  Everything  indi- 
cates anxiety  about  the  means  of  defence.  Nehemiah 
placed  two  men  at  the  head  of  this  vital  function — his 
own  brother  Hanani,  whose  concern  about  the  city  had 
been  evinced  in  his  report  of  its  condition  to  Nehemiah 
at  Susa,  and  Hananiah  the  commandant  of  the  citadel. 
This  Hananiah  was  known  to  be  "  faithful " — a  great 
point  while  traitors  in  the  highest  places  were  intriguing 
with  the  enem3^  He  was  also  exceptionally  God-fear- 
ing, described  as  one  who  ''  feared  God  above  many  " 
— another  point  recognised  by  Nehemiah  as  of  supreme 
importance  in  a  military  officer.  Here  we  have  an 
anticipation  of  the  Puritan  spirit  which  required  the 
Cromwellian  soldiers  to  be  men  of  sterHng  religious 
character.  Nehemiah  would  have  had  no  hesitation  if 
he  had  been  placed  in  the  dilemma  of  the  Athenians  when 
they  were  called  to  choose  between  Aristides  the  good 
and  Themistocles  the  clever.  With  him — much  as  brains 
were  needed,  and  he  showed  this  in  his  own  sleepless 
astuteness — integrity  and  religion  were  the  first  re- 
quisites for  an  office  of  responsibility. 

The  danger  of  the  times  is  further  indicated  by  the 
new  rule  with  regard  to  the  opening  of  the  gates. 
Oriental  custom  would  have  permitted  this  at  dawn. 
Nehemiah  would  not  allow  it  before  the  full  daytime, 
"until  the  sun  be  hot."  Levites  were  to  mount  guard 
by  day — an  indication  of  the  partially  ecclesiastical 
character  of  the  civil  government.     The  city  was  a  sort 


324  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

of  extended  temple,  and  its  citizens  constituted  a  Church 
watched  over  by  the  clergy.  At  night  the  citizens 
themselves  vi^ere  to  guard  the  walls,  as  more  watchers 
would  be  needed  during  the  hours  of  darkness  to  protect 
the  city  against  an  assault  by  surprise.  Now  these 
facts  point  to  serious  danger  and  arduous  toil.  Naturally 
many  men  would  shrink  from  the  yoke  of  citizenship 
under  such  circumstances.  It  was  so  much  pleasanter, 
so  much  easier,  so  much  quieter  for  people  to  live  in 
the  outlying  towns  and  villages,  near  to  their  own 
farms  and  vineyards.  Therefore  it  was  necessary  to 
take  a  tenth  of  the  rural  population  in  order  to  increase 
that  of  the  town.  The  chronicler  expressly  notes  that 
''the  rulers  of  the  people"  were  already  dwelling  in 
Jerusalem.  These  men  realised  their  responsibility. 
The  officers  were  to  the  fore  ;  the  men  who  needed  to 
be  urged  to  their  duty  were  the  privates.  No  doubt 
there  was  more  to  attract  the  upper  classes  to  the 
capital,  while  their  agricultural  occupations  would 
naturally  draw  many  of  the  poorer  people  into  the 
country,  and  we  must  not  altogether  condemn  the 
latter  as  less  patriotic  than  the  former.  We  cannot 
judge  the  relative  merits  of  people  who  act  differently 
till  we  know  their  several  circumstances.  Still  it 
remains  true  that  it  is  often  the  man  with  the  one 
talent  who  buries  his  charge,  because  with  him  the 
sense  of  personal  insignificance  becomes  a  temptation  to 
the  neglect  of  duty.  Hence  arises  one  of  the  most 
serious  dangers  to  a  democracy.  When  this  danger  is 
not  mastered,  the  management  of  pubHc  affairs  falls  into 
the  hands  of  self-seeking  politicians,  who  are  ready  to 
wreck  the  state  for  their  private  advantage.  It  is  most 
essential,  therefore,  that  a  public  conscience  should  be 
aroused  and  that  people  should  realise  their  duty  to  their 


Neh.  vii.  i-4;xi.j  THE  HOLY  CITY.  325 

community — to  the  town  in  which  they  live,  the  country 
to  which  they  belong. 

Nehemiah's  simple  expedient  succeeded,  and  praise 
was  earned  by  those  Jews  who  yielded  to  the  sacred 
decision  of  the  lot  and  abandoned  their  pleasant  rustic 
retreats  to  take  up  the  more  trying  posts  of  sentinels  in 
a  garrison.  According  to  his  custom,  the  chronicler 
proceeds  to  show  us  how  the  people  were  organised. 
His  many  names  have  long  ceased  to  convey  the  living 
interest  that  must  have  clustered  round  them  when  the 
families  they  represented  were  still  able  to  recognise 
their  ancestors  in  the  roll  of  honour.  But  incidentally 
he  imports  into  his  register  a  note  about  the  Great 
King's  concern  for  the  temple  worship,  from  which  we 
learn  that  Artaxerxes  made  special  provision  for  the 
support  of  the  choristers,  and  that  he  entertained  a 
Jewish  representative  in  his  court  to  keep  him  informed 
on  the  condition  of  the  distant  city.  Thus  we  have 
another  indication  of  the  royal  patronage  which  was 
behind  the  whole  movement  for  the  restoration  of  the 
Jews.  Nevertheless  the  piteous  plaint  of  the  Jews  on 
their  great  fast  day  shows  us  that  their  servitude  galled 
them  sorely.  Men  who  could  utter  that  cry  would  not 
be  bribed  into  a  state  of  cheerful  satisfaction  by  the  kind- 
ness of  their  mxaster  in  subscribing  to  their  choir  fund, 
although  doubtless  the  contribution  was  made  in  a  spirit 
of  well-meaning  generosity.  The  ideal  City  of  God  had 
not  yet  appeared,  and  the  hint  of  the  dependence  of  Jeru- 
salem on  royal  patronage  is  a  significant  reminder  of  the 
sad  fact.  It  never  did  appear,  even  in  the  brightest  days 
of  the  earthly  Jerusalem.  But  God  was  teaching  His 
people  through  the  history  of  that  unhappy  city  how 
high  the  true  ideal  must  be,  and  so  preparing  them  for 
the  heavenly  city,  the  New  Jerusalem. 


326  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


Now  we  may  take  the  high  ideal  that  was  slowly 
emerging  throughout  the  ages,  and  see  how  God  intends 
to  have  it  realised  in  the  City  of  God  which,  from  the 
days  of  Saint  Augustine,  we  have  learnt  to  look  for  in 
the  Church  of  Christ.  The  two  leading  thoughts  con- 
nected with  the  Holy  City  in  the  phase  of  her  history 
that  is  now  passing  under  our  notice  are  singularly 
applicable  to  the  Christian  community. 

First,  the  chamcterisiic  life  of  the  city.  Enclosed 
within  walls,  the  city  gained  a  peculiar  character  and 
performed  a  distinctive  mission  of  her  own.  Our  Lord 
was  not  satisfied  to  rescue  stray  sheep  on  the  mountains 
only  to  brand  them  with  His  mark  and  then  turn  them 
out  again  to  graze  in  solitude.  He  drew  them  as  a 
flock  after  Himself,  and  His  disciples  gathered  them 
into  the  fold  of  Church  fellowship.  This  is  of  as  vital 
importance  to  the  cause  of  Christianity  as  the  civic 
organisation  of  Jerusalem  was  to  that  of  Judaism.  The 
Christian  City  of  God  stands  out  before  the  world  on 
her  lofty  foundation,  the  Rock  of  Ages— a  beacon  of 
separation  from  sin,  a  testimony  to  the  grace  of  God, 
a  centre  for  the  confession  of  faith,  a  home  for  social 
worship,  a  rallying  point  for  the  forces  of  holy  warfare, 
a  sanctuary  for  the  helpless  and  oppressed. 

Second,  the  public  duty  of  citizenship.  The  reluctance 
of  Christians  to  accept  the  responsibiHties  of  Church 
membership  may  be  compared  to  the  backwardness  of 
the  Jews  to  dwell  in  their  metropolis.  Like  Jerusalem 
in  the  time  of  Nehemiah,  the  City  of  God  to-day  is  an 
outpost  in  the  battle-field,  a  fortress  surrounded  by  the 
enemy's  territory.  It  is  traitorous  to  retire  to  the  calm 
cultivation  of  one's  private  garden-plot  in  the  hour  of 
stress  and  strain  when  the  citadel  is  threatened  on  all 
sides.     It  is  the  plain  duty  of  the  people  of  God  to 


eh.vii.  1-4  ;xi.]  THE  HOLY  CITY.  327 


mount  guard  and  take  their  turn  as  watchmen  on  the 
walls  of  the  Holy  City. 

May  we  carry  the  analogy  one  step  further  ?  The 
king  of  Persia,  though  his  realm  stretched  from  the 
Tigris  to  the  iEgean,  could  not  give  much  effectual 
help  to  the  true  City  of  God.  But  the  Divine  King  of 
kings  sends  her  constant  supplies,  and  she  too,  like 
Jerusalem,  has  her  Representative  at  court,  One  who 
ever  lives  to  make  intercession  for  her. 


CHAPTER   XXIX. 

BEGINNINGS. 
Nehemiah  xii.  27-47. 

A  CURIOUS  feature  of  the  history  of  the  restoration 
of  Israel  already  met  with  several  times  is  post- 
ponement. Thus  in  the  days  of  Cyrus  Zerubbabel 
leads  up  an  expedition  for  the  express  purpose  of 
building  the  temple  at  Jerusalem ;  but  the  work  is  not 
executed  until  the  reign  of  Darius.  Again,  Ezra  brings 
the  book  of  The  Law  with  him  when  he  comes  to  the 
city  ;  yet  he  does  not  find  an  opportunity  for  publishing 
it  till  some  years  later.  Once  more,  Nehemiah  sets  to 
work  on  the  fortifications  with  the  promptitude  of  a 
practical  man  and  executes  his  task  with  astonishing 
celerity ;  still,  even  in  his  case  the  usual  breach  of 
sequence  occurs ;  here,  too,  we  have  interruption  and 
the  intrusion  of  aHen  matters,  so  that  the  crowning  act 
of  the  dedication  of  the  walls  is  delayed. 

In  this  final  instance  we  do  not  know  how  long  a 
postponement  there  was.  Towards  the  end  of  his 
work  the  chronicler  is  exceptionally  abrupt  and  dis- 
connected. In  the  section  xii.  27-43  he  gives  us  an 
extract  from  Nehemiah's  memoirs,  but  without  any 
note  of  time.  The  preservation  of  another  bit  of  the 
patriot's  original  writing  is  interesting,  not  only  because 
of  its  assured  historicity,  but  further  because  exceptional 


Neh.  xii.  27-47.]  BEGINNINGS.  329 

importance  is  given    to   the   records   that   have   been 
judged  worthy  of  being  extracted  and  made  portions  of 
permanent   scripture,  although  other  sources  are  only 
used  by  the  chronicler  as   materials   out  of  which   to 
construct  his  own  narrative  in  the  third  person.     While 
we  cannot  assign  its  exact  date  to  the  subject  of  this 
important  fragment,  one  thing  is  clear  from  its  position 
in  the  story  of  the  days  of  Nehemiah.     The  reading  of 
The  Law,  the  great  fast,  the  sealing  of  the  covenant, 
the  census,  and  the  regulations  for  peopling  Jerusalem, 
all  came  between   the  completion  of  the   fortifications 
and  the  dedication  of  them.     The  interruption  and  the 
consequent  delay  were  not  without  meaning  and  object. 
After  what  had  occurred  in  the  interval,  the  people  were 
better  prepared   to  enter  into  the  ceremony  of  dedi- 
cation   with   intelligence   and   earnestness  of  purpose. 
This  act,  although  it  was  immediately  directed  to  the 
walls,  was,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  re-consecration  of  the 
city ;  because  the  walls  were  built  in  order  to  preserve 
the  distinct  individuality,  the  unique  integrity  of  what 
they  included.     Now  the  Jews  needed   to   knov/  The 
Law  in  order  to  understand  the  destiny  of  Jerusalem  ; 
they    needed    to   devote  themselves   personally  to   the 
service  of  God,    so    that    they    might   carry   out   that 
destiny ;  and  they  needed  to  recruit  the  forces  of  the 
Holy   City,    for   the   purpose   of  giving  strength  and 
volume  to  its  future.     Thus  the  postponement  of  the 
dedication    made   that   event,   when  it  came  about,   a 
much   more   real  thing   than  it  would  have  been  if  it 
had  followed  immediately  on  the  building  of  the  walls. 
May  we  not  say  that  in  every  similar  case  the  personal 
consecration    must    precede    the    material  ?      The    city 
is  what  its  citizens  make  it.     They,  and  not  its  site 
or  its  buildings,  give  it  its  true  character.     Jerusalem 


330  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


and  Babylon,  Athens  and  Rome,  are  not  to  be  distin- 
guished in  their  topography  and  architecture  in  any- 
thing approaching  the  degree  in  which  they  are 
individuahsed  by  the  manners  and  deeds  of  their 
respective  peoples.  Most  assuredly  the  New  Jerusalem 
will  just  reflect  the  characters  of  her  citizens.  This 
City  of  God  will  be  fair  and  spotless  only  when  they 
who  tread  her  streets  are  clad  in  the  beauty  of  holiness. 
In  smaller  details,  too,  and  in  personal  matters,  we  can 
only  dedicate  aright  that  which  we  are  handling  in  a 
spirit  of  earnest  devotion.  The  miserable  superstition 
that  clouds  our  ideas  of  this  subject  rises  out  of  the 
totally  erroneous  notion  that  it  is  possible  to  have  holy 
things  without  holy  persons,  that  a  mystical  sanctity 
can  attach  itself  to  any  objects  apart  from  an  intelligent 
perception  of  some  sacred  purpose  for  which  they  are 
to  be  used.  This  materialistic  notion  degrades  religion 
into  magic ;  it  is  next  door  to  fetichism. 

It  is  important,  then,  that  we  should  understand  what 
we  mean  by  dedication.  Unfortunately  in  our  EngHsh 
Bible  the  word  "  dedicate "  is  made  to  stand  for  two 
totally  distinct  Hebrew  terms,  one  *  of  which  means  to 
'^consecrate,"  to  make  holy,  or  set  apart  for  God; 
while  the  other f  means  to  ''initiate,"  to  mark  the 
beginning  of  a  thing.  The  first  is  used  of  functions 
of  ritual,  priestly  and  sacrificial ;  but  the  second  has  a 
much  wider  application,  one  that  is  not  always  directly 
connected  with  religion.  Thus  we  meet  with  this  second 
word  in  the  regulations  of  Deuteronomy  which  lay 
down  the  conditions  on  which  certain  persons  are  to  be 
excused  from  military  service.  The  man  who  has  built 
a  new  house  but  who  has  not  "  dedicated  "  it  is  placed 


T^-TJ?,  Piel  of  *^ip  t  ''^n 


Nch.  xii.  27-47.]  BEGINNINGS.  33« 

side  by  side  with  one  who  has  planted  a  vineyard  and 
with  a  third  who  is  on  the  eve  of  his  marriage.*  Now 
the  first  word — that  describing  real  consecration — is 
used  of  the  priests'  action  in  regard  to  their  portion  of 
the  wall,  and  in  this  place  our  translators  have  rendered 
it  "  sanctified."  f  But  in  the  narrative  of  the  general 
dedication  of  the  walls  the  second  and  more  secular 
word  is  used.  The  same  word  is  used,  however,  we 
must  notice,  in  the  account  of  the  dedication  of  the 
temple. t  In  both  these  cases,  and  in  all  other  cases  of 
the  employment  of  the  word,  the  chief  meaning  conveyed 
by  it  is  just  initiation.  §  It  signalises  a  commencement. 
Therefore  the  ceremony  at  the  new  walls  was  designed 
in  the  first  instance  to  direct  attention  to  the  very  fact 
of  their  newness,  and  to  call  up  those  thoughts  and 
feelings  that  are  suitable  in  the  consideration  of  a  time 
of  commencement.  We  must  all  acknowledge  that  such 
a  time  is  one  for  very  earnest  thought.  All  our  begin- 
nings in  Hfe — the  birth  of  a  child,  a  young  man's  start 
in  the  world,  the  wedding  that  founds  the  home,  the 
occupation  of  a  new  house,  the  entrance  on  a  fresh  line 
of  business — all  such  beginnings  come  to  rouse  us  from 
the  indifference  of  routine,  to  speak  to  us  with  the  voice 
of  Providence,  to  bid  us  look  forward  and  prepare  our- 
selves for  the  future.  We  have  rounded  a  corner,  and 
a  new  vista  has  opened  up  to  our  view.  As  we  gaze 
down  the  long  aisle  we  must  be  heedless  indeed  if  we 
can  contemplate  the  vision  without  a  thrill  of  emotion, 
without  a  thought  of  anticipation.  The  new  departure  in 
external  affairs  is  an  opportunity  for  a  new  turn  in  our 

*  Deut.  XX.  5-7.  f  Neh.  hi.  I.  ±  Ezra  vi.  16. 

§  Still  in  the  earlier  scene,  the  dedication  of  the  temple,  the  sacred 
use  of  the  building  makes  the  act  of  initiation  to  be  equivalent  to 
consecration.     There  the  connection  gives  the  special  association. 


332       EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

inner  life,  and  it  calls  for  a  reconsideration   of  our 
resources  and  methods. 

One  of  the  charms  of  the  Bible  is  that,  like  nature,  it 
is  full  of  fresh  starts.  Inasmuch  as  a  perennial  breath 
of  new  life  plays  among  the  pages  of  these  ancient 
scriptures,  we  have  only  to  drink  it  in  to  feel  what 
inspiration  there  is  here  for  every  momentous  beginning. 
Just  as  the  fading,  dank  autumn  gives  way  to  the 
desolation  of  winter  in  order  that  in  due  time  the 
sleeping  seeds  and  buds  may  burst  out  in  the  birth  of 
spring  with  the  freshness  of  Eden,  God  has  ordained 
that  the  decaying  old  things  of  human  life  shall  fall 
away  and  be  forgotten,  while  He  calls  us  into  the 
heritage  of  the  new- — giving  a  new  covenant,  creating 
a  new  heart,  promising  a  new  heaven  and  a  new 
earth.  The  mistake  of  our  torpor  and  timidity  is  that 
we  will  cling  to  the  rags  of  the  past  and  only  patch 
them  v^^ith  shreds  of  the  later  age,  instead  of  boldly 
flinging  them  off  to  clothe  ourselves  in  the  new  garment 
of  praise  which  is  to  take  the  place  of  the  old  spirit  of 
heaviness. 

The  method  in  which  a  new  beginning  was  celebrated 
by  the  Jews  in  relation  to  their  restored  walls  is  illus- 
trative of  the  spirit  in  which  such  an  event  should  always 
be  contemplated. 

In  the  first  place,  as  a  preparation  for  the  whole  of 
the  subsequent  ceremonies,  the  priests  and  Levites 
carried  out  a  great  work  of  purification.  They  began 
with  themselves,  because  the  men  who  are  first  in  any 
dealings  with  religion  must  be  first  in  purity.  Judged 
by  the  highest  standard,  the  only  real  difference  of  rank 
in  the  Church  is  determined  by  varying  degrees  of 
holiness ;  merely  official  distinctions  and  those  that 
arise    from    the    unequal   distribution   of   gifts    cannot 


Neh.  xii.  27-47.]  BEGINNINGS.  333 

affect  anybody's  position  of  honour  in  the  sight  of 
God.  The  functions  of  the  recognised  ministry,  in 
particular,  demand  purity  of  character  for  their  right 
discharge.  They  that  bear  the  vessels  of  the  Lord 
must  be  clean.  And  not  only  so  in  general ;  espe- 
cially in  the  matter  of  purification  is  it  necessary  that 
those  who  carry  out  the  work  should  first  be  pure 
themselves.  What  here  applied  to  priests  and  Levites 
ceremonially  applies  in  prosaic  earnest  to  all  who  feel 
called  to  purge  society  in  the  interest  of  true  morality. 
Who  can  bring  a  clean  thing  out  of  an  unclean  ?  The 
leaders  of  moral  reforms  must  be  themselves  morally 
clean.  Only  regenerate  men  and  women  can  re- 
generate society.  If  the  salt  has  lost  its  savour  it 
will  not  arrest  corruption  in  the  sacrifice  that  is  salted 
with  it.  But  the  purification  does  not  cease  with  the 
leaders.  In  ceremonial  symbolism  all  the  people  and 
even  the  very  walls  are  also  cleansed.  This  is  done  in 
view  of  the  new  departure,  the  fresh  beginning.  Such 
an  occasion  calls  for  much  heart-searching  and  spiritual 
cleansing — a  truth  which  must  have  been  suggested 
to  the  minds  of  thoughtful  people  by  the  Levitical 
ceremonies.  It  is  a  shame  to  bring  the  old  stains  into 
the  new  scenes.  The  fresh,  clean  start  calls  for  a  new 
and  better  life. 

Next,  it  is  to  be  observed,  there  was  an  organised 
procession  round  the  walls,  a  procession  that  included 
citizens  of  every  rank — princes,  priests,  Levites,  and 
representatives  of  the  general  community,  described  as 
"  Judah  and  Benjamin."  Starting  at  the  west  end  of  the 
city,  these  people  were  divided  into  two  sections,  one 
led  by  Nehemiah  going  round  by  the  north,  and  the 
other  conducted  by  Ezra  proceeding  by  the  south,  so 
that  they  met  at  the  eastern  side  of  the  city ;  where 


334  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

Opposite  the  Mount  of  Olives  and  close  to  the  temple, 
they  all  united  in  an  enthusiastic  outburst  of  praise. 
This  arrangement  was  not  carried  out  for  any  of  the 
idle  ends  of  a  popular  pageant— to  glorify  the  pro- 
cessionists, or  to  amuse  the  spectators.  It  was  to  serve 
an  important  practical  purpose.  By  personal  parti- 
cipation in  the  ceremony  of  initiation,  all  sections  of 
the  community  would  be  brought  to  perceive  its  real 
significance.  Since  the  walls  were  in  the  keeping  of 
the  citizens,  it  was  necessary  that  the  citizens  should 
acknowledge  their  privileges  and  responsibilities.  Men 
and  women  need  to  come  individually  and  directly  face 
to  face  with  new  conditions  of  life.  Mere  dulness  of 
imagination  encourages  the  lazy  sense  of  indifference 
with  which  so  many  people  permit  themselves  to  ignore 
the  claims  of  duty,  and  the  same  cause  accounts  for  a 
melancholy  failure  to  appreciate  the  new  blessings  that 
come  from  the  untiring  bounty  of  God. 

In  the  third  place,  the  behaviour  of  the  processionists 
invites  our  attention.  The  whole  ceremony  was  one  of 
praise  and  gratitude.  Levites  were  called  in  from  the 
outlying  towns  and  villages  where  they  had  got  them- 
selves homes,  and  even  from  that  part  of  the  Jordan 
valley  that  lay  nearest  to  Jerusalem.  Their  principal 
function  was  to  swell  the  chorus  of  the  temple  singers. 
Musical  instruments  added  emphasis  to  the  shout  of 
human  voices ;  clashing  cymbals  and  finer  toned  harps 
supported  the  choral  song  with  a  rich  and  powerful 
orchestral  accompaniment,  which  was  augmented  from 
another  quarter  by  a  young  band  of  trumpeters  con- 
sisting of  some  of  the  priests'  sons.  The  immediate 
aim  of  the  music  and  singing  was  to  show  forth  the 
praises  of  God.  The  two  great  companies  were  to  give 
thanks  while  they  went  round  the  walls.     Sacrifices  of 


Neh.  xii.  27-47.]  BEGINNINGS.  335 

thanksgiving  completed  the  ceremony  when  the  pro- 
cessions were  united  and  brought  to  a  standstill  near  the 
temple.  The  thanksgiving  would  arise  out  of  a  grateful 
acknowledgment  of  the  goodness  of  God  in  leading  the 
work  of  building  the  walls  through  many  perils  and 
disappointments  to  its  present  consummation.  Rarely 
does  anything  new  spring  up  all  of  a  sudden  without 
some  relation  to  our  own  past  life  and  action  ;  but 
even  that  which  is  the  greatest  novelty  and  wonder 
to  us  must  have  a  cause  somewhere.  If  we  have 
done  nothing  to  prepare  for  the  happy  surprise,  God 
has  done  much.  Thus  the  new  start  is  an  occasion  for 
giving  thanks  to  its  great  Originator.  But  the  thank- 
fulness also  looks  forward.  The  city  was  now  in  a 
very  much  more  hopeful  condition  than  when  Nehemiah 
took  his  lonely  night  ride  among  its  ghostly  ruins.  By 
this  time  it  was  a  compact  and  strongly  fortified  centre, 
with  solid  defences  and  a  good  body  of  devoted  citizens 
pledged  to  do  their  part  in  pursuing  its  unique  destiny. 
The  prospect  of  a  happy  future  which  this  wonderful 
transformation  suggested  afforded  sufficient  reasons  for 
the  greatest  thankfulness.  The  spirit  of  praise  thus 
called  forth  would  be  one  of  the  best  guarantees  of  the 
fulfilment  of  the  high  hopes  that  it  inspired.  There  is 
nothing  that  so  surely  foredooms  people  to  failure  as  a 
despairing  blindness  to  any  perception  of  their  ad- 
vantages. The  grateful  soul  will  always  have  most 
ground  for  a  renewal  of  gratitude.  It  is  only  just  and 
reasonable  that  God  should  encourage  those  of  His 
children  who  acknowledge  His  goodness,  with  fresh 
acts  of  favour  over  and  above  what  He  does  for  all  in 
making  His  sun  to  shine  and  His  rain  to  fall  on  the 
bad  as  well  as  the  good.  But  apart  from  considera- 
tions  of  self-interest,    the   true   spirit   of  praise   will 


336  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

delight  to  pour  itself  out  in  adoration  of  the  great  and 
good  Father  of  all  blessings.  It  is  a  sign  of  sin  or  selfish- 
ness or  unbelief  when  the  element  of  praise  fails  in  our 
worship.  This  is  the  purest  and  highest  part  of  a 
religious  service,  and  it  should  take  the  first  place  in 
the  estimation  of  the  worshippers.  It  will  do  so 
directly  a  right  sense  of  the  goodness  of  God  is 
attained.  Surely  the  best  worship  is  that  in  which 
man's  needs  and  hopes  and  fears  are  all  swallowed  up 
in  the  vision  of  God's  love  and  glory,  as  the  fields  and 
woods  are  lost  in  a  dim  purple  haze  when  the  sky  is 
aglow  with  the  rose  and  saffron  of  a  brilliant  sunset. 

Further,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  a  note  of  gladness 
rings  through  the  whole  ceremony.  The  account  of  the 
dedication  concludes  with  the  perfectly  jubilant  verse, 
"And  they  offered  great  sacrifices  that  day,  and 
rejoiced ;  for  God  had  made  them  rejoice  with  great  joy  ; 
and  the  women  also  and  the  children  rejoiced  :  so  that 
the  joy  of  Jerusalem  was  heard  even  afar  off"."  *  The  joy 
would  be  mingled  with  the  praise,  because  when  people 
see  the  goodness  of  God  enough  to  praise  Him  from 
their  hearts  they  cannot  but  rejoice  ;  and  then  the  joy 
would  react  on  the  praise,  because  the  more  blessedness 
God  sends  the  more  heartily  must  His  grateful  children 
thank  Him.  Now  the  outburst  of  joy  was  accompanied 
with  sacrifices.  In  the  deepest  sense,  a  sense  almost  un- 
known till  it  was  revealed  by  Christ,  there  is  a  grand, 
solemn  joy  in  sacrifice.  But  even  to  those  who  have 
only  reached  the  Jewish  standpoint,  the  self-surrender 
expressed  by  a  ceremonial  sacrifice  as  a  s37mbol  of  glad 
thankfulness  in  turn  affects  the  offerer  so  as  to  heighten 
his   gladness.      No   doubt   there   were   mundane   and 

*  Neh.  xii.  43. 


Neh.  xii.  27-47.]  BEGINNINGS.  337 


secular  elements  in  this  joy  of  a  jubilant  city.  A 
laborious  and  dangerous  task  had  been  completed 
the  city  had  been  fortified  and  made  able  to  defend 
itself  against  the  horrors  of  an  assault ;  there  was  a 
fair  prospect  of  comfort  and  perhaps  even  honour  for 
the  oppressed  and  despised  citizens  of  Jerusalem.  But 
beyond  all  this  and  beneath  it,  doubtless  many  had 
discovered  Nehemiah's  great  secret  for  themselves ; 
they  had  found  their  strength  in  the  joy  of  the  Lord. 
In  face  of  heathenish  pleasures  and  superstitious  terrors 
it  was  much  to  know  that  God  expected  His  holy 
people  to  be  happy,  and  more,  to  find  that  the  direct 
road  to  happiness  was  holiness.  This  was  the  best 
part  of  the  joy  which  all  the  people  experienced  with 
more  or  less  thought  and  appreciation  of  its  meaning. 
Joy  is  contagious.  Here  was  a  city  full  of  gladness. 
Nehemiah  expressly  takes  note  of  the  fact  that  the 
women  and  children  shared  in  the  universal  joy.  They 
must  have  been  among  the  most  pitiable  sufferers  in 
the  previous  calamities ;  and  they  had  taken  their  place 
in  the  great  Ecclesia  when  The  Law  was  read,  and 
again  when  the  sad  confession  of  the  nation's  sin  was 
poured  forth.  It  was  well  that  they  should  not  be  left 
out  of  the  later  scene,  when  joy  and  praise  filled  the 
stage.  For  children  especially  who  would  not  covet 
this  gladness  in  religion  ?  It  is  only  a  miserable 
short-sightedness  that  allows  any  one  to  put  before 
children  ideas  of  God  and  spiritual  things -which  must 
repel,  because  of  their  gloom  and  sternness.  Let  us 
reserve  these  ideas  for  the  castigation  of  Pharisees. 
A  scene  of  joyous  worship  is  truly  typical  of  the 
perfect  City  of  God  of  which  children  are  the  typical 
citizens — the  New  Jerusalem  of  whose  inhabitants  it 
is  said,   "God   shall   wipe  away  all    tears    from    their 

22 


338  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


eyes;  and  there  shall  be  no  more  death,  neither  sorrow, 
nor  crying,  neither  shall  there  be  any  more  pain  ;  for 
the  former  things  are  passed  away." 

Lastly,  following  his  extract  from  the  memoirs  of 
Nehemiah,  the  chronicler  shows  how  the  glad  spirit 
of  this  great  day  of  dedication  flowed  out  and  mani- 
fested itself  in  those  engagements  to  which  he  was  always 
delighted  to  turn — the  Levitical  services.  Thus  the 
tithe  gathering  and  the  temple  psalmody  were  helped 
forward.  The  gladness  of  religion  is  not  confined  to 
set  services  of  public  worship ;  but  when  those  services 
are  held  it  must  flood  them  with  the  music  of  praise. 
It  is  impossible  for  the  worship  of  God's  house  to  be 
limp  and  depressed  when  the  souls  of  His  children  are 
joyous  and  eager.  A  half-hearted,  melancholy  faith 
may  be  content  with  neglected  churches  and  slovenly 
services — but  not  a  joyous  religion  which  men  and 
women  love  and  glory  in.  While  "  The  joy  of  the  Lord  " 
has  many  happy  effects  on  the  world,  it  also  crowds 
churches,  fills  treasuries,  sustains  various  ministries, 
inspires  hymns  of  praise,  and  brings  life  and  vigour 
into  all  the  work  of  religion. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

THE  RIGOUR  OF  THE  REFORMER. 

Nehemiaii  xiii. 

THERE  is  no  finality  in  history.  The  chapter  that 
seems  to  be  rounded  off  with  a  perfect  conclusion 
always  leaves  room  for  an  appendix,  which  in  its 
turn  may  serve  as  an  introduction  to  another  chapter. 
Ezra's  and  Nehemiah's  work  seemed  to  have  reached 
its  climax  in  the  happy  scene  of  the  dedication  of  the 
walls.  All  difficulties  had  vanished ;  the  new  order 
had  been  greeted  v,^ith  widespread  enthusiasm ;  the 
future  promised  to  be  smooth  and  prosperous.  If  the 
chronicler  had  laid  down  his  pen  at  this  point,  as  any 
dramatist  before  Ibsen  who  was  not  bound  by  the 
exigencies  of  prosaic  facts  would  have  done,  his  work 
might  have  presented  a  much  more  artistic  appearance 
than  it  now  wears.  And  yet  it  would  have  been 
artificial,  and  therefore  false  to  the  highest  art  of 
history.  In  adding  a  further  extract  from  Nehemiah's 
memoirs  that  discloses  a  revival  of  the  old  troubles, 
and  so  shows  that  the  evils  against  which  the  reformers 
contended  had  not  been  stamped  out,  the  writer  mars 
the  literary  effect  of  his  record  of  their  triumph  ;  but, 
at  the  same  time,  he  satisfies  us  that  he  is  in  contact 
with  real  life,  its  imperfections  and  its  disappointments. 
It   is   not    easy   to  settle  the  time   of   the   incident 

'339 


340  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

mentioned  in  chapter  xiii.  1-3.  The  phrase  ''on  that 
day "  with  which  the  passage  opens  seems  to  point 
back  to  the  previous  chapter.  If  so  it  cannot  be  taken 
literally,  because  what  it  describes  must  be  assigned  to 
a  later  period  than  the  contents  of  the  paragraph  that 
follows  it.  It  forms  an  introduction  to  the  extract  from 
Nehemiah's  memoirs,  and  its  chronological  position  is 
even  later  than  the  date  of  the  first  part  of  the  extract, 
because  that  begins  with  the  words  ''And  before  this,"* 
i.e.,  before  the  incident  that  opens  the  chapter.  Now  it  is 
clear  that  Nehemiah's  narrative  here  refers  to  a  time  con- 
siderably after  the  transactions  of  the  previous  chapter, 
inasmuch  as  he  states  that  Vv^hen  the  first  of  the  occur- 
rences he  now  records  happened  he  was  away  in  the 
court  of  Artaxerxes.t  Still  later,  then,  must  that  event 
be  placed  before  which  this  new  incident  occurred.  We 
might  perhaps  suppose  that  the  phrase  "  at  that  day  " 
is  carried  over  directly  from  the  chronicler's  original 
source  and  belongs  to  its  antecedents  in  that  document ; 
but  so  clumsy  a  piece  of  joinery  is  scarcely  admissible. 
It  is  better  to  take  the  phrase  quite  generally.  What- 
ever it  meant  when  first  penned,  it  is  clear  that  the 
events  it  introduces  belong  only  indefinitely  to  the  times 
previously  mentioned.  We  are  really  landed  by  them 
in  a  new  state  of  affairs.  Here  we  must  notice  that 
the  introductory  passage  is  immediately  connected 
with  the  Nehemiah  record.  It  tells  how  the  law  from 
Deuteronomy  requiring  the  exclusion  of  the  Ammonite 
and  the  Moabite  was  read  and  acted  on.  This  is  to 
be  remembered «when  we  are  studying  the  subsequent 
events. 

When  Nehemiah's  extended  leave  of  absence   had 

*  Neh.  xiii.  4.  f  Neli.  xiii.  6. 


Neh.  xiii.]      THE  RIGOUR   OF   THE   REFORMER.  341 

come  to  an  end,  or  when  perhaps  he  had  been  ex- 
pressly summoned  back  by  Artaxerxes,  his  return  to 
Babylon  was  followed  by  a  melancholy  relapse  in  the 
reformed  city  of  Jerusalem.  This  is  not  by  any  means 
asiionishing.  Nothing  so  hinders  and  distresses  the 
missionary  as  the  repeated  outbreak  of  their  old 
heathen  vices  among  his  converts.  The  drunkard 
cannot  be  reckoned  safe  directly  he  has  signed  the 
pledge.  Old  habits  may  be  damped  down  without 
being  extinguished,  and  when  this  is  the  case  they  will 
flame  up  again  as  soon  as  the  repressive  influence  is 
removed.  In  the  present  instance  there  was  a  distinct 
party  in  the  city,  consisting  of  some  of  the  most  pro- 
minent and  influential  citizens,  which  disapproved  of 
the  separatist,  puritanical  policy  of  the  reformers  and 
advocated  a  more  liberal  course.  Some  of  its  members 
may  have  been  conscientious  men,  who  honestly  de- 
plored what  they  would  regard  as  the  disastrous  state 
of  isolation  brought  about  by  the  action  of  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah.  After  having  been  silenced  for  a  time  by 
the  powerful  presence  of  the  great  reformers,  these 
people  would  come  out  and  declare  themselves  when 
the  restraining  influences  were  removed.  Meanwhile  we 
hear  no  more  of  Ezra.  Like  Zerubbabel  in  the  earlier 
period,  he  drops  out  of  the  history  without  a  hint  as  to 
his  end.  He  may  have  returned  to  Babylon,  thinking 
his  work  complete  ;  possibly  he  had  been  recalled  by 
the  king. 

It  is  likely  that  some  rumours  of  the  declension 
of  Jerusalem  reached  Nehemiah  at  the  Persian  court. 
But  he  did  not  discover  the  whole  extent  of  this  retro- 
grade movement  until  he  was  once  more  in  the  city, 
with  a  second  leave  of  absence  from  Artaxerxes.  Then 
there  were  four  evils  that  he  perceived  with  great  grief. 


342  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

The  first  was  that  Tobiah  had  got  a  footing  in  the  city. 
In  the  earher  period  this  ''servant"  had  been  carrying 
on  intrigues  with  some  members  of  the  aristocracy. 
The  party  of  opposition  had  done  its  best  to  represent 
him  in  a  favourable  Hght  to  Nehemiah,  and  all  the 
while  this  party  had  been  traitorously  keeping  Tobiah 
informed  of  the  state  of  affairs  in  the  city.  But  now  a 
further  step  was  taken.  Though  one  of  the  three  leading 
enemies  of  Nehemiah,  the  ally  and  supporter  of  the 
Samaritan  governor  Sanballat,  this  man  was  actually 
permitted  to  have  a  lodging  in  the  precincts  of  the 
temple.  The  locahty  was  selected,  doubtless,  because 
it  was  within  the  immediate  jurisdiction  of  the  priests, 
among  whom  the  Jewish  opponents  of  Nehemiah  were 
found.  It  is  as  though,  in  his  quarrel  with  Henry, 
Thomas  a  Becket  had  lodged  a  papal  envoy  in  the 
cathedral  close  at  Canterbury.  To  a  Jew  who  did  not 
treat  the  ordinances  of  religion  with  the  Sadducean 
laxity  that  was  always  to  be  found  in  some  of  the 
leading  members  of  the  priesthood,  this  was  most 
abhorrent.  He  saw  in  it  a  defilement  of  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  the  temple,  if  not  of  the  sacred  enclosure 
itself,  as  well  as  an  insult  to  the  former  governor  of 
the  city.  Tobiah  may  have  used  his  room  for  the 
purpose  of  entertaining  visitors  in  state ;  but  it  may 
only  have  been  a  warehouse  for  trade  stores,  as  it  had 
previously  been  a  place  in  which  the  bulky  sacrificial 
gifts  were  stowed  away.  Such  a  degradation  of  it, 
superseding  its  previous  sacred  use,  would  aggravate 
the  evil  in  the  sight  of  so  strict  a  man  as  Nehemiah. 

The  outrage  was  easily  accounted  for.  Tobiah  was 
allied  by  marriage  to  the  priest  who  was  the  steward  of 
this  chamber.  Thus  we  have  a  clear  case  of  trouble 
arising  out  of  the  system  of  foreign  marriages  which 


Neh.xiii.]      THE  RIGOUR   OF  THE  REFORMER.  343 

Ezra  had  so  strenuously  opposed.  It  seems  to  have 
opened  the  eyes  of  the  younger  reformer  to  the  evil  of 
these  marriages,  for  hitherto  we  have  not  found  him 
taking  any  active  part  in  furthering  the  action  of  Ezra 
with  regard  to  them.  Possibly  he  had  not  come  across 
an  earlier  instance.  But  now  it  was  plain  enough  that 
the  effect  was  to  bring  a  pronounced  enemy  of  all  he 
loved  and  advocated  into  the  heart  of  the  city,  with  the 
rights  of  a  tenant,  too,  to  back  him  up.  If  "  evil  com- 
munications corrupt  good  manners,"  this  was  most 
injurious  to  the  cause  of  the  reformation.  The  time 
had  not  arrived  when  a  generous  spirit  could  dare  to 
welcome  all-comers  to  Jerusalem.  The  city  was  still  a 
fortress  in  danger  of  siege.  More  than  that,  it  was 
a  Church  threatened  with  dissolution  by  reason  of 
the  admission  of  unfit  members.  Whatever  we  may 
say  to  the  social  and  political  aspects  of  the  case, 
ecclesiastically  regarded,  laxity  at  the  present  stage 
would  have  been  fatal  to  the  future  of  Judaism,  and 
the  mere  presence  of  such  a  man  as  Tobiah,  openly 
sanctioned  by  a  leading  priest,  was  a  glaring  in- 
stance of  laxity ;  Nehemiah  was  bound  to  stop  the 
mischief. 

The  second  evil  was  the  neglect  of  the  payments  due 
to  the  Levites.  It  is  to  be  observed  again  that  the 
Levites  are  most  closely  associated  with  the  reforming 
position.  Religious  laxity  and  indifference  had  had  an 
effect  on  the  treasury  for  which  these  men  were  the 
collectors.  The  financial  thermometer  is  a  very  rough 
test  of  the  spiritual  condition  of  a  religious  community, 
and  we  often  read  it  erroneously,  not  only  because  we 
cannot  gauge  the  amount  of  sacrifice  made  by  people  in 
very  diff'erent  circumstances,  nor  just  because  we  are 
unable  to  discover  the  motives  that  prompt  the  giving  of 


344  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

alms  "  before  men  "  ;  but  also,  when  every  allowance 
is  made  for  these  causes  of  uncertainty,  because  the 
gifts  which  are  usually  considered  most  generous  rarely 
involve  enough  strain  and  effort  to  bring  the  deepest 
springs  of  life  into  play.  And  yet  it  must  be  allowed 
that  a  declining  subscription  list  is  usually  to  be 
regarded  as  one  sign  of  waning  interest  on  the  part  of 
the  supporters  of  any  public  movement.  When  we 
consider  the  matter  from  the  other  side,  we  must 
acknowledge  that  the  best  way  to  improve  the  pecuniary 
position  of  any  religious  enterprise  is  not  to  work  the 
exhausted  pump  more  vigorously,  but  to  drive  the  well 
deeper  and  tap  the  resources  of  generosity  that  lie 
nearer  the  heart — not  to  beg  harder,  but  to  awaken  a 
better  spirit  of  devotion. 

The  third  indication  of  backsHding  that  vexed  the 
soul  of  Nehemiah  was  Sabbath  profanation.  He  saw 
labour  and  commerce  both  proceeding  on  the  day 
of  rest — Jews  treading  the  winepress,  carrying  their 
sheaves,  lading  their  asses,  and  bringing  loads  of  v*dne, 
grapes,  and  figs,  and  all  sorts  of  wares,  into  Jerusalem 
for  sale  ;  and  fishmongers  and  pedlars  from  Tyre — not, 
of  course,  themselves  to  be  blamed  for  failing  to  respect 
the  festival  of  a  people  whose  religion  they  did  not  share 
— pouring  into  the  city,  and  opening  their  markets  as 
on  any  weekday.  Nehemiah  was  greatly  alarmed.  He 
went  at  once  to  the  nobles,  who  seem  to  have  been 
governing  the  cit}^,  as  a  sort  of  oligarchy,  during  his 
absence,  and  expostulated  with  them  on  their  danger 
of  provoking  the  wrath  of  God  again,  urging  that 
Sabbath-breaking  had  been  one  of  the  offences  which 
had  called  down  the  judgment  of  Heaven  on  their 
fathers.  Then  he  took  means  to  prevent  the  coming 
of  foreign  traders  on  the  Sabbath,  by  ordering  the  gates 


Neh.  xiii.]      THE   RIGOUR   OF   THE  REFORMER.  345 


to  be  kept  closed  from  Friday  evening  till  the  sacred 
day  was  over.  Once  or  twice  these  people  came  up  as 
usual,  and  camped  just  outside  the  city  ;  but  as  this 
was  disturbing  to  the  ])eace  of  the  day,  Nehemiah 
threatened  that  if  they  repeated  the  annoyance  he  would 
lay  hands  on  them.  Lastly,  he  charged  the  Levites, 
first  to  cleanse  themselves  that  they  might  be  ready 
to  undertake  a  work  of  purification,  and  then  to  take 
charge  of  the  gates  on  the  Sabbath  and  see  that  the 
day  was  hallowed  in  the  cessation  of  all  labour.  Thus 
both  by  persuasion  and  by  vigorous  active  measures 
Nehemiah  put  an  end  to  the  disorder. 

The  importance  attached  to  this  matter  is  a  sign  of 
the  prominence  given  to  Sabbath-keeping  in  Judaism. 
The  same  thing  was  seen  earlier  in  the  selection  of  the 
law  of  the  Sabbath  as  one  of  the  two  or  three  rules  to 
be  specially  noted,  and  to  which  the  Jews  were  to  parti- 
cularly pledge  themselves  in  the  covenant.*  Reference 
was  then  made  to  the  very  act  of  the  Tyrians  now 
complained  of,  the  offering  of  wares  and  food  for 
sale  in  Jerusalem  on  the  Sabbath  day.  Putting 
these  two  passages  together,  we  can  see  where  the 
Sabbath-breaking  came  from.  It  was  the  invasion  of 
a  foreign  custom — like  the  dreaded  introduction  of  the 
"  Continental  Sunday  "  into  England.  Now  to  Nehe- 
miah the  fact  of  the  foreign  origin  of  the  custom  would 
be  a  heavy  condemnation  for  it.  Next  to  circumcision, 
Sabbath-keeping  was  the  principal  mark  of  the  Jew. 
In  the  days  of  our  Lord  it  was  the  most  highly  prized 
feature  of  the  ancient  faith.  This  was  then  so  obvious 
that  it  was  laid  hold  of  by  Roman  satirists,  who  knew 
little  about  the  strange  traders  in  ih^. Ghetto  except  that 

*  Neh.  X.  31. 


346  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

they  "  sabbatised."  Nehemiah  saw  that  if  the  sacred 
day  of  rest  were  to  be  abandoned,  one  of  his  bulwarks 
of  separation  w^ould  be  lost.  Thus  for  him,  with  his 
fixed  policy,  and  in  view  of  the  dangers  of  his  age, 
there  was  a  very  urgent  reason  for  maintaining  the 
Sabbath,  a  reason  which  of  course  does  not  apply  to  us 
in  England  to-day.  We  must  pass  on  to  the  teaching 
of  Christ  to  have  this  question  put  on  a  wider  and  more 
permanent  basis.  With  that  Divine  insight  of  His 
which  penetrated  to  the  root  of  every  matter,  our  Lord 
saw  through  the  miserable  formalism  that  made  an  idol 
of  a  da}'',  and  in  so  doing  turned  a  boon  into  a  burden  ; 
at  the  same  time  He  rescued  the  sublimely  simple  truth 
which  contains  both  the  justification  and  the  limitation 
of  the  Sabbath,  when  He  declared,  ''  The  Sabbath  was 
made  for  man,  and  not  man  for  the  Sabbath."  In  re- 
sisting the  rigour  of  legal-minded  Sabbatarianism,  the 
modern  mind  seems  to  have  confined  its  attention  to  the 
second  clause  of  this  great  utterance,  to  the  neglect  of  its 
first  clause.  Is  it  nothing,  then,  that  Jesus  said,  "  The 
Sabbath  v/as  made  for  man  " — not  for  the  Jew  only,  but 
for  man  ?  Although  we  may  feel  free  from  the  religion 
of  law  in  regard  to  the  observance  of  days  as  much  as 
in  other  external  matters,  is  it  not  foolish  for  us  to 
minimise  a  blessing  that  Jesus  Christ  expressly  declared 
to  be  for  the  good  of  the  human  race  ?  If  the  rest  day 
was  needed  by  the  Oriental  in  the  slow-moving  life  of 
antiquity,  is^  it  any  less  requisite  for  the  Western  in 
the  rush  of  these  later  times  ?  But  if  it  is  necessary  to 
our  welfare,  the  neglect  of  it  is  sinful.  Thus  not  be- 
cause of  the  inherent  sanctity  of  seasons,  but  on  our 
Lord's  own  ground  of  the  highest  utilitarianism — a 
utilitarianism  which  reaches  to  other  people,  and  even 
to  animals,  and  affects  the  soul  as  well  as  the  body 


Nch.  xiii.]      THE  RIGOUR  OF  THE  REFORMER.  347 


— the  reservation  of  one  day  in  seven  for  rest  is  a 
sacred  duty.  "  The  world  is  too  much  with  us  "  for 
the  six  days.  We  can  ill  afford  to  lose  the  recurrent 
escape  from  its  blighting  companionship  originally 
provided  by  the  seventh  and  now  enjoyed  on  our 
Sunday. 

Lastly,  Nehemiah  was  confronted  by  the  social  effects 
of  foreign  marriage  alliances.  These  alliances  had  been 
contracted  by  Jews  resident  in  the  south-western  corner 
of  Judaea,  who  may  not  have  come  under  the  influence 
of  Ezra's  drastic  reformation  in  Jerusalem,  and  who 
probably  were  not  married  till  after  that  event.  They 
afford  another  evidence  of  the  counter  current  that  was 
running  so  strongly  against  the  regulations  of  the  party 
of  rigour  while  Nehemiah  was  away.  The  laxity  of 
the  border  people  may  be  accounted  for  without  calling 
in  any  subtle  motives.  But  their  fault  was  shared 
by  a  member  of  the  gejis  of  the  high-priest,  who  had 
actually  wedded  the  daughter  of  Nehemiah's  arch-enemy 
Sanballat !  Clearly  this  was  a  political  alliance,  and  it 
indicated  a  defiant  reversal  of  the  policy  of  the  reformers 
in  the  very  highest  circles.  The  offender,  after  being 
expelled  from  Jerusalem,  is  said  to  have  been  the  founder 
of  the  Samaritan  temple  on  Mount  Gerizim. 

Then  the  social  mischief  of  the  mixed  marriages  was 
showing  itself  in  the  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  language. 
The  Philistine  language  was  not  allied  to  the  Egyptian, 
as  some  have  thought,  nor  was  it  Indo-Germanic,  as 
others  have  supposed,  but  it  was  Semitic,  and  only  a 
different  dialect  from  the  Hebrew ;  and  yet  the  difficulty 
persons  from  the  south  of  England  feel  in  understand- 
ing the  speech  of  Yorkshiremen  in  remote  parts  of  the 
county  will  help  us  to  account  for  a  practical  loss  of 
mutual  intelligence  between  people  of  different  dialects, 


348  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


when  these  dialects  were  still  more  isolated  by  having 
grown  up  in  two  separate  and  hostile  nations.  For  the 
children  of  Jewish  parents  to  be  talking  with  the  tones 
and  accents  of  the  hereditary  enemies  of  Israel  was 
intolerable.  When  he  heard  the  hated  sounds,  Nehe- 
miah  simply  lost  his  temper.  With  a  curse  on  his  lips 
he  rushed  at  the  fathers,  striking  them  and  tearing 
their  hair.  It  was  the  rage  of  bitter  disappointment  ; 
but  behind  it  lay  the  grim  set  purpose  in  holding  to 
which  with  dogged  tenacity  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  saved 
Judaism  from  extinction.  Separatism  is  never  gracious  ; 
yet  it  may  be  right.  The  reformer  is  not  generally  of 
a  mild  temperament.  We  may  regret  his  harshness  ; 
but  we  should  remember  that  the  world  has  only  seen 
one  perfectly  meek  and  yet  thoroughly  effective  Revo- 
lutionist, only  one  ''  Lamb  of  God  "  who  could  be  also 
named  *'  the  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah." 

The  whole  situation  was  disappointing  to  Nehemiah, 
and  his  memoir  ends  in  a  prayer  beneath  which 
we  can  detect  an  undertone  of  melancholy.  Three 
times  during  this  last  section  he  appeals  to  God  to 
remember  him — not  to  wipe  out  his  good  deeds,*  to 
spare  him  according  to  the  greatness  of  the  Divine 
mercy,t  and  finally  to  remember  him  for  good.j:  The 
memories  of  the  Jerusalem  covenanters  had  been 
brief;  during  the  short  interval  of  their  leader's  absence 
they  had  forgotten  his  discipline  and  fallen  back  into 
negligent  ways.  It  was  vain  to  trust  to  the  fickle 
fancies  of  men.  With  a  sense  of  w^eary  loneliness, 
taught  to  feel  his  own  insignificance  in  that  great  tide 
of  human  life  that  flows  on  in  its  own  course  though 
the  most  prominent  figures  drop  out  of  notice,  Nehemiah 


Neh.  xiii.  14.  f  Neh.  xiii.  22.  \  Neh.  xiii.  31. 


Nell.  xiii.J      THE  RIGOUR  OF  THE  REFORMER.  349 


turned  to  his  God,  the  one  Friend  who  never  forgets. 
He  was  learning  the  vanity  of  the  world's  fame ;  yet 
he  shrank  from  the  idea  of  falling  into  oblivion.  There- 
fore it  was  his  prayer  that  he  might  abide  in  the  memory 
of  God.  This  was  by  itself  a  restful  thought.  It  is 
cheering  to  think  that  we  may  dwell  in  the  memory  of 
those  we  love.  But  to  be  held  in  the  thought  of  God 
is  to  have  a  place  in  the  heart  of  infinite  love.  And 
yet  this  was  not  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  matter  to 
Nehemiah.  It  is  really  nothing  better  than  a  frivolous 
vanity,  that  can  induce  any  one  to  be  willing  to  sacrifice 
the  prospect  of  a  real  eternal  life  in  exchange  for  the 
pallid  shadow  of  immortality  ascribed  to  the  '^  choir 
invisible  "  of  those  who  are  only  thought  of  as  living  in 
the  memory  of  the  world  they  have  infiiuenced  enough  to 
win  '*  a  niche  in  the  temple  of  fame."  What  is  fame  to 
a  dead  man  mouldering  in  his  coffin  ?  Even  the  higher 
thought  of  being  remembered  by  God  is  a  poor  con- 
solation in  prospect  of  blank  non-existence.  Nehemiah 
expects  something  better,  for  he  begs  God  to  remember 
him  in  mercy  and  for  good.  It  is  a  very  narrow,  prosaic 
interpretation  of  this  prayer  to  say  that  he  only  means 
that  he  desires  a  blessing  during  the  remainder  of  his 
Hfe  in  the  court  at  Susa.  On  the  other  hand,  it  may  be 
too  much  to  ascribe  the  definite  hope  of  a  future  life  to 
this  Old  Testament  saint.  And  yet,  vague  as  his 
thought  may  be,  it  is  the  utterance  of  a  profound 
yearning  of  the  soul  that  breaks  out  in  moments  of 
disappointment  with  an  intensity  never  to  be  satisfied 
within  the  range  of  our  cramped  mortal  state.  In  this 
utterance  of  Nehemiah  we  have,  at  least,  a  seed  thought 
that  should  germinate  into  the  great  hope  of  immortality. 
If  God  could  forget  His  children,  we  might  expect  them 
to  perish,  swept  aside  like  the  withered  leaves  of  autumn. 


3SO  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


But  if  He  continues  to  remember  them,  it  is  not  just  to 
His  Fatherhood  to  charge  Him  with  permitting  such  a 
fate  to  fall  upon  His  offspring.  No  human  father  who 
is  worthy  of  the  name  would  wiUingly  let  go  the 
children  whom  he  cherishes  in  mind  and  heart.  Is  it 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  perfect  Divine  Father, 
who  is  both  almighty  and  all-loving,  would  be  less 
constant  ?  But  if  He  remembers  His  children,  and 
remembers  thtm  for  good,  He  will  surely  preserve  them. 
If  His  memory  is  unfading,  and  if  His  love  and  power 
are  eternal,  those  who  have  a  place  in  His  immortal 
thought  must  also  have  a  share  in  His  immortal  life 


CHAPTER   XXXI. 

THE  BOOK  OF  ESTHER:  INTRODUCTORY. 

THERE  is  a  striking  contrast  between  the  high 
estimation  in  which  the  Book  of  Esther  is  now 
cherished  among  the  Jews  and  the  slighting  treatment 
that  is  often  meted  out  to  it  in  the  Christian  Church. 
According  to  the  great  Maimonides,  though  the  Pro- 
phets and  the  Hagiographa  will  pass  away  when  the 
Messiah  comes,  this  one  book  will  share  with  The  Law 
in  the  honour  of  being  retained.  It  is  known  as  ''  The 
Roll  "  par  excellence^  and  the  Jews  have  a  proverb,  '^  The 
Prophets  may  fail,  but  not  The  Roll."  The  peculiar 
importance  attached  to  the  book  may  be  explained  by 
its  use  in  the  Feast  of  Purim — the  festival  which  is 
supposed  to  commemorate  the  deliverance  of  the  Jews 
from  the  murderous  designs  of  Haman,  and  their 
triumph  over  their  Gentile  enemies — for  it  is  then  read 
through  in  the  synagogue.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
grave  doubts  which  were  once  felt  by  some  of  the 
Jews  have  been  retained  and  even  strengthened  in  the 
Christian  Church.  Esther  was  omitted  from  the  Canon 
by  some  of  the  Oriental  Fathers.  Luther,  with  the 
daring  freedom  he  always  manifested  in  pronouncing 
sentence  on  the  books  of  the  Bible,  after  referring  to 
the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees,  says,  '*  I  am  so  hostile 
to  this  book  and  that  of  Esther,  that  I  wish  they  did 


352  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


not  exist ;  they  are  too  Judaising,  and  contain  many 
heathenish  improprieties."  In  our  own  day  two  classes 
of  objections  have  been  raised. 

The  first  is  historical.  By  many  the  Book  of  Esther 
is  regarded  as  a  fantastic  romance ;  by  some  it  is  even 
relegated  to  the  category  of  astronomical  myths ;  and 
by  others  it  is  considered  to  be  a  mystical  allegory. 
Even  the  most  sober  criticism  is  troubled  at  its  con- 
tents. There  can  be  no  question  that  the  Ahasuerus 
{Ahashverosh)  of  Esther  is  the  well-known  Xerxes  of 
history,  the  invader  of  Greece  who  is  described  in 
the  pages  of  Herodotus.  But  then,  it  is  asked,  what 
room  have  we  for  the  story  of  Esther  in  the  life  of 
that  monarch  ?  His  wife  was  a  cruel  and  superstitious 
woman,  named  Amestris.  We  cannot  identify  her 
with  Esther,  because  she  was  the  daughter  of  one  of 
the  Persian  generals,  and  also  because  she  was  married 
to  Xerxes  many  years  before  the  date  of  Esther's 
appearance  on  the  scene.  Two  of  her  sons  accom- 
panied the  expedition  to  Greece,  which  must  have 
preceded  the  introduction  of  Esther  to  the  harem. 
Moreover,  it  was  contrary  to  law  for  a  Persian  sovereign 
to  take  a  wife  except  from  his  own  family,  or  from  one 
of  five  noble  famihes.  Can  Amestris  be  identified  with 
Vashti  ?  If  so,  it  is  certain  that  she  must  have  been 
restored  to  favour,  because  Amestris  held  the  queen's 
place  in  the  later  years  of  Xerxes,  when  the  uxorious 
monarch  came  more  and  more  under  her  influence. 
Esther,  it  is  clear,  can  only  have  been  a  secondary  wife 
in  the  eyes  of  the  law,  whatever  position  she  may  have 
held  for  a  season  in  the  court  of  the  king.  The  pre- 
decessors of  Xerxes  had  several  wives ;  our  narrative 
makes  it  evident  that  Ahasuerus  followed  the  Oriental 
custom  of  keeping  a  large  harem..     To  Esther,  at  best, 


THE  BOOK  OF  ESTHER:    INTRODUCTORY.        353 

therefore,  must  be  assigned  the  place  of  a  favourite 
member  of  the  seraglio. 

Then  it  is  difficult  to  think  that  Esther  would  not 
have  been  recognised  as  a  Jewess  by  Haman,  since 
the  nationality  of  Mordecai,  whose  relationship  to  her 
had  not  been  hidden,  was  known  in  the  city  of  Susa. 
Moreover,  the  appalling  massacre  of  '^ their  enemies" 
by  the  Jews,  carried  on  in  cold  blood,  and  expressly 
including  "  women  and  children,"  has  been  regarded  as 
highly  improbable.  Finally,  the  whole  story  is  so  well 
knit  together,  its  successive  incidents  arrange  them- 
selves so  perfectly  and  lead  up  to  the  conclusion  with 
such  neat  precision,  that  it  is  not  easy  to  assign  it  to 
the  normal  course  of  events.  We  do  not  expect  to 
meet  with  this  sort  of  thing  outside  the  realm  of  fairy 
tales.  Putting  all  these  facts  together,  we  must  feel 
that  there  is  some  force  in  the  contention  that  the  book 
is  not  strictly  historical. 

But  there  is  another  side  to  the  question.  This  book 
is  marvellously  true  to  Persian  manners.  It  is  redolent 
of  the  atmosphere  of  the  court  at  Susa.  Its  accuracy 
in  this  respect  has  been  traced  down  to  the  most 
minute  details.  The  character  of  Ahasuerus  is  drawn 
to  the  life ;  point  after  point  in  it  may  be  matched  in 
the  Xerxes  of  Herodotus.  The  opening  sentence  of 
the  book  shows  that  it  was  written  some  time  after  the 
date  of  the  king  in  whose  reign  the  story  is  set,  because 
it  describes  him  in  language  only  suited  to  a  later 
period — "  this  is  Ahasuerus  which  reigned  from  India 
unto  Ethiopia,"  etc.  But  the  writer  could  not  have 
been  far  removed  from  the  Persian  period.  The  book 
bears  evidence  of  having  been  written  in  the  heart  of 
Persia,  by  a  man  who  was  intimately  acquainted  with 
the  scenery  he  described.      There  seems  to  be   some 


354  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

reason  for  believing  in  the   substantial   accuracy  of  a 
narrative  that  is  so  true  to  life  in  these  respects. 

The  simplest  way  out  of  the  dilemma  is  to  suppose 
that  the  story  of  Esther  stands  upon  a  historical  basis 
of  fact,  and  that  it  has  been  worked  up  into  its  present 
literary  form  by  a  Jew  of  later  days  who  was  living  in 
Persia,  and  who  was  perfectly  familiar  with  the  records 
and  traditions  of  the  reign  of  Xerxes.  It  is  only  an 
unwarrantable,  a  priori  theory  that  can  be  upset  by 
our  acceptance  of  this  conclusion.  We  have  no  right 
to  demand  that  the  Bible  shall  not  contain  anything 
but  what  is  strictly  historical.  The  Book  of  Job  has 
long  been  accepted  as  a  subHme  poem,  founded  on  fact 
perhaps,  but  owing  its  chief  value  to  the  divinely  inspired 
thoughts  of  its  author.  The  Book  of  Jonah  is  regarded 
by  many  cautious  and  devout  readers  as  an  allegory 
replete  with  important  lessons  concerning  a  very  ugly 
aspect  of  Jewish  selfishness.  These  two  works  are  not 
the  less  valuable  because  men  are  coming  to  understand 
that  their  places  in  the  library  of  the  Hebrew  Canon  are 
not  among  the  strict  records  of  history.  And  the  Book 
of  Esther  need  not  be  dishonoured  when  some  room  is 
allowed  for  the  play  of  the  creative  imagination  of  its 
author.  In  these  days  of  the  theological  novel  we  are 
scarcely  in  a  position  to  object  to  what  may  be  thought 
to  partake  of  the  character  of  a  romance,  even  if  it  is 
found  in  the  Bible.  No  one  asks  whether  our  Lord's 
parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  was  a  true  story  of  some 
Galilean  family.  The  Pilgrim's  Progress  has  its  mission, 
though  it  is  not  to  be  verified  by  any  authentic  Annals 
of  Elstow.  It  is  rather  pleasing  than  otherwise  to  see 
that  the  compilers  of  the  Jewish  Canon  were  not 
prevented  by  Providence  from  including  a  little  anti- 
cipation of  that  w^ork   of  the  imagination  which  has 


THE  BOOK  OF  ESTHER:    INTRODUCTORY.        355 


blossomed    so    abundantly   in    the   highest   and    best 
culture  of  our  own  day. 

A  much  more  serious  objection  is  urged  on  religious 
and  moral  grounds.  It  is  indisputable  that  the  book  is 
not  characterised  by  the  pure  and  lofty  spirit  that  gives 
its  stamp  to  most  of  the  other  contents  of  the  Bible. 
The  absence  of  the  name  of  God  from  its  pages  has 
been  often  commented  on.  The  Jews  long  ago  recog- 
nised this  fact,  and  they  tried  to  discover  the  sacred 
name  in  acrostic  form  at  one  or  two  places  where  the 
initial  letters  of  a  group  of  words  were  found  to  spell  it. 
But  quite  apart  from  all  such  fantastic  trifling,  it  has  been 
customary  to  argue  that,  though  unnamed,  the  presence 
of  God  is  felt  throughout  the  story  in  the  wonderful 
Providence  that  protects  the  Jews  and  frustrates  the 
designs  of  their  arch-enemy  Haman.  The  difficulty, 
however,  is  wider  and  deeper.  There  is  no  reference 
to  religion,  it  is  said,  even  where  it  is  most  called  for ; 
no  reference  to  prayer  in  the  hour  of  danger,  when 
prayer  should  have  been  the  first  resource  of  a  devout 
soul ;  in  fact  no  indication  of  devoutness  of  thought  or 
conduct.  Mordecai  fasts  ;  we  are  not  told  that  he  prays. 
The  whole  narrative  is  immersed  in  a  secular  atmo- 
sphere. The  religious  character  of  apocryphal  additions 
that  were  inserted  by  later  hands  is  a  tacit  witness  to 
a  deficiency  felt  by  pious  Jews. 

These  charges  have  been  met  by  the  hypothesis  that 
the  author  found  it  necessary  to  disguise  his  religious 
beliefs  in  a  work  that  was  to  come  under  the  eyes  of 
heathen  readers.  Still  we  cannot  imagine  that  an 
Isaiah  or  an  Ezra  would  have  treated  his  subject  in  the 
style  of  our  author.  It  must  be  admitted  that  we  have 
a  composition  on  a  lower  plane  than  that  of  the  prophetic 
and  priestly  histories  of  Israel.     The  theory  that  all 


356  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER, 

parts  of  the  Bible  are  inspired  with  an  equal  measure  of 
the  Divine  Spirit  halts  at  this  point.  But  what  was 
to  prevent  a  composition  analogous  to  secular  literature 
taking  its  place  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  ?  Have  we 
any  evidence  that  the  obscure  scribes  who  arranged  the 
Canon  were  infallibly  inspired  to  include  only  devotional 
works  ?  It  is  plain  that  the  Book  of  Esther  was 
valued  on  national  rather  than  on  religious  grounds. 
The  Feast  of  Purim  was  a  social  and  national  occasion 
of  rejoicing,  not  a  solemn  religious  ceremony  like  the 
Passover ;  and  this  document  obtains  its  place  of 
honour  through  its  connection  with  the  feast.  The 
book,  then,  stands  to  the  Hebrew  Psalms  somewhat  as 
Macaulay's  ballad  of  the  Armada  stands  to  the  hymns 
of  Watts  and  the  Wesleys.  It  is  mainly  patriotic  rather 
than  religious ;  its  purpose  is  to  stir  the  soul  of  national 
enthusiasm  through  the  long  ages  of  the  oppression  of 
Israel. 

It  is  not  just,  however,  to  assert  that  there  are  no 
evidences  of  religious  faith  in  the  story  of  Esther. 
Mordecai  warns  his  cousin  that  if  she  will  not  exert 
herself  to  defend  her  people,  'Hhen  shall  there  relief 
and  deliverance  arise  to  the  Jews  from  another  place"* 
What  can  this  be  but  a  reserved  utterance  of  a  devout 
man's  faith  in  that  Providence  which  has  always 
followed  the  '*  favoured  people  "  ?  Moreover,  Mordecai 
seems  to  perceive  a  Divine  destiny  in  the  exaltation 
of  Esther  when  he  asks,  "  And  who  knov/eth  whether 
thou  art  come  to  the  kingdom  for  such  a  time  as  this  ?  "f 
The  old  commentators  were  not  wrong  when  they  saw 
the  hand  of  Providence  in  the  whole  story.  If  we  are 
to  allow  some  licence  to  the  imagination  of  the  author 

*  Esther  iv.  14.  f  Ibid. 


THE  BOOK  OF  ESTHER:    INTRODUCTORY.        357 


in  the  shaping  and  arrangement  of  the  narrative,  we 
must  assign  to  him  also  a  real  faith  in  Providence,  for 
he  describes  a  wonderful  interlinking  of  events  all  lead- 
ing up  to  the  deliverance  of  the  Jews.     Long  before 
Haman  has  any  quarrel  with  Mordecai,  the  disgusting 
degradation  of  a  drinking  bout  issues  in  an  insult  offered 
to  a  favourite  queen.     This  shameful  occurrence  is  the 
occasion  of  the  selection  of  a  Jewess,  whose  high  position 
at  court  thus  acquired  enables  her  to  save  her  people. 
But  there  is  a  secondary  plot.     Mordecai's  discovery  of 
the  conspirators  who  would  have  assassinated  Ahasuerus 
gives  him  a   claim   on  the  king's  generosity,   and  so 
prepares  the   way,  not  only  for  his  escape  from    the 
clutches  of  Haman,  but  also  for  his  triumph  over  his 
enemy.     And  this  is  brought  about — as  we  should  say 
— "  by  accident."     If  Xerxes  had  not  had  a  sleepless 
night  just  at  the  right  time,  if  the  part  of  his  state 
records  selected  for  reading  to  him  in  his  wakefulness 
had  not  been  just  that  which  told  the  story  of  Mordecai's 
great  service,  the  occasion  for  the  turn  in  the  tide  of 
the  fortune  of  the  Jews  would  not  have  arisen.     But 
all  was  so  fitted  together  as  to  lead  step  by  step  on  to 
the  victorious  conclusion.     No  Jew  could  have  penned 
such  a  story  as  this  without  having  intended  his  co- 
religionists  to   recognise   the   unseen    presence  of  an 
over-ruling    Providence  throughout    the  whole    course 
of  events. 

But  the  gravest  charge  has  yet  to  be  considered.  It 
is  urged  against  the  Book  of  Esther  that  the  moral 
tone  of  it  is  unworthy  of  Scripture.  It  is  dedicated 
to  nothing  higher  than  the  exaltation  of  the  Jews. 
Other  books  of  the  Bible  reveal  God  as  the  Supreme, 
and  the  Jews  as  His  servants,  often  His  unworthy  and 
unfaithful   servants.     This  book  sets  the  Jews  in  the 


358       EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


first  place ;  and  Providence,  even  if  tacitly  recognised, 
is  quite  subservient  to  their  welfare.     Israel  does  not 
here  appear  as  living   for  the  glory  of  God,   but   all 
history  works  for  the  glory  of  Israel.     In  accordance 
with  the  spirit  of  the  story,  everything  that  opposes 
the  Jews  is  condemned,  everything  that  favours  them 
is  honoured.      Worst  of  all,  this  practical  deification 
of  Israel   permits  a  tone   of  heartless    cruelty.      The 
doctrine  of  separatism  is  monstrously  exaggerated.    The 
Jews  are  seen  to  be  surrounded  by  their  *'  enemies." 
Haman,  the  chief  of  them,  is  not  only  punished  as  he 
richly  deserves  to   be    punished,  but  he  is  made  the 
recipient  of  unrestrained  scorn  and  rage,  and  his  sons 
are  impaled  on  their  father's  huge  stake.     The  Jews  de- 
fend themselves  from  threatened  massacre  by  a  legahsed 
slaughter  of  their  "  enemies."     We  cannot  imagine  a 
%■  scene    more   foreign    to    the    patience    and   gentleness 
inculcated    by    our    Lord.      Yet   we    must   remember 
that    the  quarrel  did   not  begin  with  the  Jews ;  or  if 
we  must  see  the  origin  of  it  in  the  pride  of  a  Jew,  we 
must  recollect  that  his  offence  was  slight  and  only  the 
act  of  one  man.     As  far  as  the  narrative  shows,  the 
Jews  were  engaged  in  their  peaceable  occupations  when 
they  were  threatened  with  extinction  by  a  violent  out- 
burst of  the   mad  Judenhetze   that   has    pursued    this 
unhappy  people  through  all  the  centuries  of  history. 
In  the  first   instance,  their   act   of  vengeance   was   a 
measure  of  self-defence.     If  they  fell  upon  their  enemies 
with  fierce  anger,  it  was  after  an  order  of  extermination 
had  driven  them  to  bay.     If  they  indulged  in  a  whole- 
sale bloodshed,  not  even  sparing  women  or  children, 
exactly  the   same  doom  had  been  hanging  over  their 
own  heads,  and  their  own  wives  and  children  had  been 
included  in  its  ferocious  sentence.     This  fact  does  not 


THE  BOOK   OF  ESTHER:    INTRODUCTORY.        359 

excuse  the  savagery  of  the  action  of  the  Jews ;  but 
it  amply  accounts  for  their  conduct.  They  were  wild 
with  terror,  and  they  defended  their  homes  with  the 
fury  of  madmen.  Their  action  did  not  go  beyond  the 
prayer  of  the  Psalmist  who  wrote,  in  trim  metrical 
order,  concerning  the  hated  Babylon — 

"  Happy  shall  he  be,  that  taketh  and  dasheth  thy  little  ones 
Against  the  rock."  * 

It  is  more  difficult  to  account  for  the  responsible  part 
taken  by  Mordecai  and  Esther  in  begging  permission 
for  this  awful  massacre.  The  last  pages  of  the  Book 
of  Esther  reek  with  blood.  A  whole  empire  is  con- 
verted into  shambles  for  human  slaughter.  We  turn 
with  loathing  from  this  gigantic  horror,  glad  to  take 
refuge  in  the  hope  that  the  author  has  dipped  his  brush 
in  darker  colours  than  the  real  events  would  warrant. 
Nevertheless  such  a  massacre  as  this  is  unhappily 
not  at  all  beyond  the  known  facts  of  history  on  other 
occasions — not  in  its  extent;  the  means  by  which  it 
is  here  carried  out  are  doubtless  exceptional.  Xerxes 
himself  was  so  heartless  and  so  capricious  that  any 
act  of  folly  or  wickedness  could  be  credited  of  him. 

After  all  that  can  be  said  for  it,  clearly  this  Book 
of  Esther  cannot  claim  the  veneration  that  we  attach  to 
the  more  choice  utterances  of  Old  Testament  literature. 
It  never  lifts  us  with  the  inspiration  of  prophecy ;  it 
never  commands  the  reverence  which  we  feel  in  studying 
the  historical  books.  Yet  we  must  not  therefore  assume 
that  it  has  not  its  use.  It  illustrates  an  important 
phase  in  the  development  of  Jewish  life  and  thought. 
It  also  introduces  us  to  characters  and  incidents  that 
reveal  human  nature  in  very  various  lights.     To  con- 


*  Psalm  cxxxvii.  9. 


36o  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

template  such  a  revelation  should  not  be  without  profit. 
After  the  Bible,  what  book  should  we  regard  as^  on 
the  whole,  most  serviceable  for  our  enlightenment  and 
nurture  ?  Since  next  to  the  knowledge  of  God  the 
knowledge  of  man  is  most  important,  might  we  not  assign 
this  second  place  of  honour  to  the  works  of  Shakespeare 
rather  than  to  any  theological  treatise  ?  And  if  so  may 
we  not  be  grateful  that  something  after  the  order  of  a 
Shakespearian  revelation  of  man  is  contained  even  in 
one  book  of  the  Bible  ? 

It  may  be  best  to  treat  a  book  of  this  character  in  a 
different  manner  from  the  weighty  historical  work  that 
precedes  it,  and,  instead  of  expounding  its  chapters 
seriatim,  to  gather  up  its  lessons  in  a  series  of  brief 
character  studies. 


T 


CHAPTER   XXXII. 

AHASUERUS  AND   VASHTI. 
Esther  i. 

HE  character  of  Ahasuerus  illustrates  the  Nemesis 
of  absolutism,  by  showing  how  unlimited  power 
is  crushed  and  dissolved  beneath  the  weight  of  its  own 
immensity.  The  very  vastness  of  his  domains  over- 
whelms the  despot.  While  he  thinks  himself  free  to 
disport  according  to  his  will,  he  is  in  reahty  the  slave  of 
his  own  machinery  of  government.  He  is  so  entirely 
dependent  for  information  on  subordinates,  who  can 
deceive  him  to  suit  their  own  private  ends,  that  he 
often  becomes  a  mere  puppet  of  the  political  wire-pullers. 
In  the  fury  of  his  passion  he  issues  his  terrible  mandates, 
with  the  confidence  of  a  master  whose  slightest  whim 
is  a  law  to  the  nations,  and  yet  that  very  passion  has 
been  cleverly  worked  up  by  some  of  his  servants,  who 
are  laughing  in  their  sleeves  at  the  simphcity  of  their 
dupe,  even  while  they  are  fawning  on  him  with  ob- 
sequious flattery.  In  the  story  of  Esther  Ahasuerus 
is  turned  about  hither  and  thither  by  his  courtiers, 
according  as  one  or  another  is  clever  enough  to  obtain 
a  temporary  hearing.  In  the  opening  scene  he  is  the 
victim  of  a  harem  plot  which  deprives  him  of  his 
favourite  consort.  Subsequently  Haman  poisons  his 
mind     with     calumnies    about    a     loyal,     industrious 


Z(>2  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

section  of  his  subjects.  He  is  only  undeceived  by 
another  movement  in  the  harem.  Even  the  jealously 
guarded  women  of  the  royal  household  know  more  of 
the  actual  state  of  affairs  in  the  outside  world  than  the 
bewildered  monarch.  The  king  is  so  high  above  his 
realm  that  he  cannot  see  what  is  going  on  in  it ;  and  all 
that  he  can  learn  about  it  passes  through  such  a  variety 
of  intermediary  agents  that  it  is  coloured  and  distorted 
in  the  process. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  man  who  is  exalted  to  the 
pedestal  of  a  god  is  made  dizzy  by  his  own  altitude. 
Absolutism  drove  the  Roman  Emperor  Caligula  mad  ; 
it  punished  the  Xerxes  of  Herodotus  with  childishness. 
The  silly  monarch  who  would  decorate  a  tree  with  the 
jewellery  of  a  prince  in  reward  for  its  fruitfulness,  and 
flog  and  chain  the  Hellespont  as  a  punishment  for  its 
tempestuousness,  is  not  fit  to  be  let  out  of  the  nursery. 
Such  conduct  as  his  discovers  an  ineptitude  that  is  next 
door  to  idiocy.  When  the  same  man  appears  on  the 
pages  of  Scripture  under  the  name  of  Ahasuerus,  his 
weakness  is  despicable.  The  most  keen-sighted  ruler 
of  millions  is  liable  to  be  misinformed ;  the  strongest 
administrator  of  a  gigantic  empire  is  compelled  to  move 
with  difficulty  in  the  midst  of  the  elaborate  organisation 
of  his  government.  But  Ahasuerus  is  neither  keen- 
sighted  nor  strong.  He  is  a  victim  of  the  last  court 
intrigue,  a  believer  in  the  idlest  gossip;  and  he  is  worse, 
for  even  on  the  suppositions  presented  to  him  he  behaves 
with  folly  and  senseless  fury.  His  conduct  to  Vashti 
is  first  insulting  and  then  ungrateful  ;  for  fidelity  to 
her  worthless  husband  would  prompt  her  to  decline  to 
risk  herself  among  a  crew  of  drunken  revellers.  His 
consent  to  the  diabolical  proposal  of  his  grand  vizier 
for  a   massacre,  without  an   atom   of  proof  that   the 


Esther  i.]  AHASUERUS  AND   VASIITI.  363 

victims  are  guilty,  exhibits  a  hopeless  state  of  mental 
feebleness.  His  equal  readiness  to  transfer  the  mandate 
of  wholesale  murder  to  persons  described  indefinitely 
as  the  "  enemies  "  of  these  people  shows  how  completely 
he  is  twisted  about  by  the  latest  breeze.  As  the  palace 
plots  develop  we  see  this  great  king  in  all  his  pride  and 
majesty  tossed  to  and  fro  like  a  shuttle-cock.  And  yet 
he  can  sting.  It  is  a  dangerous  game  for  the  players, 
and  the  object  of  it  is  to  get  the  deadly  venom  of  the 
royal  rage  to  light  on  the  head  of  the  opposite  party. 
We  could  not  have  a  more  certain  proof  of  the  vanity 
of  "ambition  that  o'erleaps  itself"  than  this  conversion 
of  immeasurable  power  into  helpless  weakness  on  the 
part  of  the  Persian  sovereign. 

We  naturally  start  with  this  glaring  exhibition  of  the 
irony  of  fate  in  our  study  of  Ahasuerus,  because  it  is 
the  most  pronounced  factor  in  his  character  and  career. 
There  are  other  elements  of  the  picture,  however, 
which  are  not,  Hke  this,  confined  to  the  abnormal 
experience  of  solitary  rulers.  Next  to  the  revenge  of 
absolutism  on  its  possessor,  the  more  vulgar  effects  of 
extravagant  luxury  and  self-indulgence  are  to  be  seen 
in  the  degraded  Persian  court  Ufe.  Very  Ukely  the 
writer  of  our  Book  of  Esther  introduces  these  matters 
with  the  primary  object  of  enhancing  the  significance 
of  his  main  theme  by  making  us  feel  how  great  a 
danger  the  Jews  were  in,  and  how  magnificent  a  tri- 
umph was  won  for  them  by  the  heroic  Jewess  of 
the  harem.  But  the  scene  that  he  thus  brings  before 
us  throws  light  on  the  situation  ail  round.  Xerxes' 
idea  of  unbridled  power  is  that  it  admits  of  unlimited 
pleasure.  Our  author's  picture  of  the  splendid  palace, 
with  its  richly  coloured  awnings  stretched  across 
from  marble  pillars  to  silver  rods  over  the  tesselated 


364  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


pavement,  where  the  most  exalted  guests  recline  in  the 
shade  on  gold  and  silver  seats,  while  they  feast  hugely 
and  drink  heavily  day  after  day,  shows  us  how  the 
provinces  were  being  drained  to  enrich  the  court,  and 
how  the  royal  treasury  was  being  lavished  on  idle 
festivity.  That  was  bad  enough,  but  its  effects  were 
worse.  The  law  was  licence.  ''The  drinking  was 
according  to  the  law,"  and  this  law  was  that  there 
should  be  no  limit  to  it,  everybody  taking  just  as  much 
wine  as  he  pleased.  Naturally  such  a  rule  ostentatiously 
paraded  before  a  dissolute  company  led  to  a  scene  of 
downright  bestial  debauchery.  According  to  Herodotus, 
the  Persians  were  addicted  to  drunkenness,  and  the 
incident  described  in  the  first  chapter  of  Esther  is  quite 
in  accordance  with  the  Greek  historian's  account  of  the 
followers  of  Xerxes. 

The  worst'  effect  of  this  vice  of  drunkenness  is  its 
degrading  influence  on  the  conduct  and  character  of 
men.  It  robs  its  victims  of  self-respect  and  manliness, 
and  sends  them  to  wallow  in  the  mire  with  swinish 
obscenity.  What  they  would  not  dream  of  stooping  to 
in  their  sober  moments,  they  revel  in  with  shameless 
ostentation  when  their  brains  are  clouded  with  intoxi- 
cating drink.  Husbands,  who  are  gentle  and  considerate 
at  other  times,  are  then  transformed  into  brutes,  who  can 
take  pleasure  in  trampling  on  their  wives.  It  is  no  excuse 
to  plead  that  the  drunkard  is  a  madm.an  unaccount- 
able for  his  actions  ;  he  is  accountable  for  having  put 
himself  in  his  degraded  condition.  If  he  is  temporarily 
insane,  he  has  poisoned  his  own  intellect  by  swallowing 
a  noxious  drug  with  his  eyes  open.  He  is  responsible 
for  that  action,  and  therefore  he  must  be  held  to  be 
responsible  for  its  consequences.  If  he  had  given  due 
consideration  to  his  conduct,  he  might  have  foreseen 


Esther  i.]  AHASUERUS  AND   VASHTI,  365 

whither  it  was  tending.  The  man  who  has  been  foolish 
enough  to  launch  his  boat  on  the  rapids  cannot  divert 
its  course  when  he  is  startled  by  the  thunder  of  the 
falls  he  is  approaching ;  but  he  should  have  thought  of 
that  before  leaving  the  safety  of  the  shore. 

The  immediate  consequence  of  the  disgusting  degra- 
dation of  drunkenness,  in  the  case  of  Ahasucrus,  is  that 
the  monarch  grossly  insults  his  queen.  A  moment's 
consideration  would  have  suggested  the  danger  as  well 
as  the  scandal  of  his  behaviour.  But  in  his  heedless 
folly  the  debauchee  hurls  himself  over  the  precipice, 
from  the  height  of  his  royal  dignity  down  to  the  very 
pit  of  ignominy,  and  then  he  is  only  enraged  that  Vashti 
refuses  to  be  dragged  down  with  him.  It  is  a  revolt- 
ing scene,  and  one  to  show  how  the  awful  vice  of 
drunkenness  levels  all  distinctions  ;  here  it  outrages  the 
most  sacred  rules  of  Oriental  etiquette.  The  seclusion 
of  the  harem  is  to  be  violated  for  the  amusement  of  the 
dissolute  king's  boon  companions. 

In  the  story  of  Esther  poor  Vashti's  fall  is  only  intro- 
duced in  order  to  make  way  for  her  Hebrew  rival. 
But  after  ages  have  naturally  sided  with  the  wronged 
queen.  Was  it  true  modesty  that  prompted  her  daring 
refusal,  or  the  lawful  pride  of  womanhood  ?  If  so, 
all  women  should  honour  Vashti  as  the  vindicator 
of  their  dues.  Whatever  "  woman's  rights  "  may  be 
maintained  in  the  field  of  politics,  the  very  existence 
of  the  home,  the  basis  of  society  itself,  depends  on 
those  more  profound  and  inalienable  rights  that  touch 
the  character  of  pure  womanliness.  The  first  of  a 
woman's  rights  is  the  right  to  her  own  person.  But 
this  right  is  ignored  in  Oriental  civilisation.  The 
sweet  English  word  "home"  is  unknown  in  the  court 
of  such  a  king  as  Ahasuerus.     To  think  of  it  in  this 


366  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

connection  is  as  incongruous  as  to  imagine  a  dai' 
springing  up  through  the  boards  of  a  dancing  salof 
The  unhappy  Vashti  had  never  known  this  choicest  S 
words ;  but  she  may  have  had  a  due  conception  Oi  a 
woman's  true  dignity,  as  far  as  the  perverted  ideas  of 
the  East  permitted.  And  yet  even  here  a  painful  sus- 
picion obtrudes  itself  on  our  notice.  Vashti  had  been 
feasting  with  'the  women  of  the  harem  when  she  re- 
ceived the  brutal  mandate  from  her  lord.  Had  she  too 
lost  her  balance  of  judgment  under  the  bewitching  in- 
fluence of  the  wine-cup  ?  Was  she  rendered  reckless 
by  the  excitement  of  her  festivities  ?  Was  her  refusal 
the  result  of  the  factitious  courage  that  springs  from  an 
unwholesome  excitement  or  an  equally  effective  mental 
stupor  ?  Since  one  of  the  commonest  results  of  intoxi- 
cation is  a  quarrelsomeness  of  temper,  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  Vashti's  flat  refusal  to  obey  may  have  some 
connection  with  her  previous  festivities.  In  that  case, 
of  course,  something  must  be  detracted  from  her  glory 
as  the  martyr  of  womanliness.  A  horrible  picture  is 
this — a  drunken  king  quarrelling  with  his  drunken 
queen  ;  these  two  people,  set  in  the  highest  places  in 
their  vast  realm,  descending  from  the  very  pinnacle 
of  greatness  to  grovel  in  debased  intemperance  !  It 
would  not  be  fair  to  the  poor,  wronged  queen  to 
assert  so  much  without  any  clear  evidence  in  support 
of  the  darker  view  of  her  conduct.  Still  it  must  be 
admitted  that  it  is  difficult  for  any  of  the  members  of 
a  dissolute  society  to  keep  their  garments  clean.  Un- 
happily it  is  only  too  frequently  the  case  that,  even  in 
a  Christian  land,  womanhood  is  degraded  by  becoming 
the  victim  of  intemperance.  No  sight  on  earth  is  more 
sickening.  A  woman  may  be  loaded  with  insults, 
and  yet  she  may  keep  her  soul  white  as  the  soul  of 


Esther  i.]  AHASUERUS  AND   VASHTI.  367 


St.  Agnes.  It  is  not  an  outrage  on  her  dignity,  offered 
by  the  drunken  king  to  his  queen,  that  really  marks 
her  degradation.  To  all  fair  judgments,  that  only 
degrades  the  brute  who  offers  it ;  but  the  white  lily  is 
bruised  and  trampled  in  the  dust  when  she  who  wears 
it  herself  consents  to  fling  it  away. 

The  action  of  Ahasuerus  on  receipt  of  his  queen's 
refusal  reveals  another  trait  in  his  weak  character. 
Jealous  eyes — always  watching  the  favourite  of  the 
harem — discover  an  opportunity  for  a  gleeful  triumph. 
The  advisers  of  the  king  are  cunning  enough  to  set  the 
action  of  Vashti  in  the  light  of  a  public  example.  If  a 
woman  in  so  exalted  a  position  is  permitted  to  disobey 
her  husband  with  impunity,  other  wives  will  appeal 
to  her  case  and  break  out  of  bounds.  It  is  a  mean 
plea,  the  plea  of  weakness  on  the  part  of  the  speaker, 
Memucan,  the  last  of  the  seven  princes.  Is  this  man 
only  finding  an  excuse  for  the  king  ?  or  may  it  be 
supposed  that  his  thoughts  are  travelling  away  to  a 
shrew  in  his  own  home  ?  The  strange  thing  is  that 
the  king  is  not  content  wreaking  his  vengeance  on  the 
proud  Vashti.  He  is  persuaded  to  utilise  the  occasion 
of  her  act  of  insubordination  in  order  to  issue  a  decree 
commanding  the  subjection  of  all  wives  to  their  husbands. 
The  queen's  conduct  is  treated  as  an  instance  of  a 
growing  spirit  of  independence  on  the  part  of  the 
women  of  Persia,  which  must  be  crushed  forthwith. 
One  would  think  that  the  women  were  slaves,  and 
that  the  princes  were  acting  like  the  Romans  when 
they  issued  repressive  measures  from  dread  of  a 
''  Servile  War." 

If  such  a  law  as  this  had  ever  been  passed,  we  might 
well  understand  the  complaint  of  those  who  say  it  is 
unjust    that    the    function    of    legislation    should    be 


368  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


monopolised  by  one  sex.  Even  in  the  West,  where 
women  are  comparatively  free  and  are  supposed  to  be 
treated  on  an  equality  with  men,  wrong  is  often  done 
because  the  laws  which  concern  them  more  especially 
are  all  made  by  men.  In  the  East,  where  they  are 
regarded  as  property,  like  their  husbands'  camels  and 
oxen,  cruel  injustice  is  inevitable.  But  this  injustice 
cannot  go  unpunished.  It  must  react  on  its  perpetrators, 
blunting  their  finer  feelings,  lowering  their  better 
nature,  robbing  them  of  those  sacred  confidences  of 
husband  and  wife  which  never  spring  up  on  the 
territory  of  the  slave-driver. 

But  we  have  only  to  consider  the  domestic  edict 
of  Ahasuerus  to  see  its  frothy  vanity.  When  it  was 
issued  it  must  have  struck  everybody  who  had  the 
faintest  sense  of  humour  as  simply  ridiculous.  It  is  not 
by  the  rough  instrumentahty  of  the  law  that  difficult 
questions  of  the  relations  between  the  sexes  can  be 
adjusted.  The  law  can  see  that  a  formal  contract  is  not 
violated  with  impunity.  The  law  can  protect  the  indi- 
vidual parties  to  the  contract  from  the  most  brutal  forms 
of  cruelty — though  even  this  is  very  difficult  between 
husband  and  wife.  But  the  law  cannot  secure  real 
justice  in  the  home.  This  must  be  left  to  the  working 
of  principles  of  righteousness  and  to  the  mutual  con- 
siderateness  of  those  who  are  concerned.  Where  these 
elements  are  wanting,  no  legislation  on  matrimony  can 
restore  the  peace  of  a  shattered  home. 

The  order  of  Ahasuerus,  however,  was  too  indefinite 
to  have  very  serious  results.  The  tyrannical  husband 
would  not  have  waited  for  any  such  excuse  as  it  might 
afford  him  for  exacting  obedience  from  his  oppressed 
household  drudge.  The  strong-minded  woman  would 
mock  at  the  king's  order,  and  have  her  own  way  as 


Esther  i.J  AHASUERUS  AND   VASHTl.  369 


before.  Who  could  hinder  her  ?  Certainly  not  her 
husband.  The  yoke  of  years  of  meek  submission  was 
not  to  be  broken  in  a  day  by  a  royal  proclamation. 
But  wherever  the  true  idea  of  marriage  was  realised — 
and  we  must  have  sufficient  faith  in  human  nature  to 
be  assured  that  this  was  sometimes  the  case  even  in 
the  realm  of  Xerxes — the  husband  and  wife  who  knew 
themselves  to  be  one,  united  by  the  closest  ties  of  love 
and  sympathy  and  mutual  confidence,  would  laugh  in 
their  happiness  and  perhaps  spare  a  thought  of  pity  for 
the  poor,  silly  king  who  was  advertising  his  domestic 
troubles  to  the  world,  and  thereby  exhibiting  his  shallow 
notions  of  wedded  life — blind,  absolutely  blind,  to  the 
sweet  secret  that  was  heaven  to  them. 

We  may  be  sure  that  the  singular  edict  remained  a 
dead  letter.  But  the  king  would  be  master  in  his  own 
palace.  So  Vashti  fell.  We  hear  no  more  of  her, 
but  we  can  guess  too  well  what  her  most  probable  fate 
must  have  been.*  The  gates  of  death  are  never 
difficult  to  find  in  an  Oriental  palace ;  there  are  always 
jealous  rivals  eager  to  triumph  over  the  fall  of  a  royal 
favourite.  Still  Ahasuerus  had  been  really  fond  of  the 
queen  who  paid  so  dearly  for  her  one  act  of  indepen- 
dence. Repenting  of  his  drunken  rage,  the  king  let 
his  thoughts  revert  to  his  former  favourite,  a  most 
dangerous  thing  for  those  who  had  hastened  her  re- 
moval. The  easiest  escape  for  them  was  to  play  on 
his  coarse  nature  by  introducing  to  his  notice  a  bevy  of 
girls  from  whom  he  might  select  a  new  favourite.  This 
was    by  no  means  a  dignified  proceeding  for  Esther, 


*  On  the  supposition  that  the  writer  is  not  here  recording  his- 
torical facts  in  the  life  of  Aniestris,  the  real  queen  of  Xerxes,  who  we 
know  was  not  murdered. 


24 


370  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

the  maiden  to  whom  the  first  prize  in  the  exhibition  of 
beauty  was  awarded  by  the  royal  fancier.  But  it  gave 
her  the  place  of  power  from  which  to  help  her  people 
in  their  hour  of  desperate  need.  And  here  we  come  to 
some  redeeming  features  in  the  character  of  the  king. 
He  is  not  lacking  in  generosity ;  and  he  owns  to  a 
certain  sense  of  justice.  In  the  crowd  of  royal  cares 
and  pleasures,  he  has  forgotten  how  an  obscure  Jew 
saved  his  life  by  revealing  one  of  the  many  plots  that 
make  the  pleasures  of  a  despot  as  hollow  a  mockery 
as  the  feast  of  Damocles.  On  the  chance  discovery  of 
his  negligence,  Ahasuerus  hastens  to  atone  for  it  with 
ostentatious  generosity.  Again,  no  sooner  does  he  find 
that  he  has  been  duped  by  Haman  into  an  act  of  cruel 
injustice  than  he  tries  to  counteract  the  mischief  by  an 
equally  savage  measure  of  retaliation.  A  strange  way 
of  administering  justice  !  Yet  it  must  be  admitted  that 
in  this  the  capricious,  blundering  king  means  honestly. 
The  bitter  irony  of  it  all  is  that  so  awful  a  power  of 
life  and  death  should  be  lodged  in  the  hands  of  one  who 
is  so  totally  incapacitated  for  a  wise  use  of  it. 


CHAPTER   XXXIII. 

HAM  AN. 
Esther  iii.  i-6;  v.  9-14;  vii.  5-iO- 

HAMAN  is  the  Judas  of  Israel.  Not  that  his  con- 
duct or  his  place  in  history  would  bring  him  into 
comparison  with  the  traitor  apostle,  for  lie  was  an  open 
foe  and  a  foreigner.  But  he  is  treated  by  popular 
Judaism  as  the  Arch- Enemy,  just  as  Judas  is  treated 
by  popular  Christianity.  Like  Judas,  he  has  assigned 
to  him  a  solitary  pre-eminence  in  wickedness,  which  is 
almost  inhuman.  As  in  the  case  of  Judas,  there  is 
thought  to  be  no  call  for  charity  or  mercy  in  judging 
Haman.  He  shares  with  Judas  the  curse  of  Cain. 
Boundless  execration  is  heaped  on  his  head.  Horror 
and  hatred  have  almost  transformed  him  into  Satan. 
He  is  called  **  The  Agagite,"  an  obscure  title  which  is 
best  explained  as  a  later  Jewish  nickname  derived  from  a 
reference  to  the  king  of  Amalek  who  was  hewn  in  pieces 
before  the  Lord.  In  the  Septuagint  he  is  surnamed 
"The  Macedonian,"  because  when  that  version  was 
made  the  enemies  of  Israel  were  the  representatives  of 
the  empire  of  Alexander  and  his  successors.  During 
the  dramatic  reading  of  the  Book  of  Esther  in  a  Jewish 
synagogue  at  the  Feast  of  Purim,  the  congregation  may 
be  found  taking  the  part  of  a  chorus  and  exclaiming  at 
every  mention  of  the  name  of  Haman,  "  May  his  name 


372  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


be  blotted  out,"  "  Let  the  name  of  the  ungodly  perish," 
while  boys  with  mallets  will  pound  stones  and  bits 
of  wood  on  which  the  odious  name  is  written.  This 
frantic  extravagance  would  be  unaccountable  but  for 
the  fact  that  the  people  whose  "badge  is  sufferance" 
has  summed  up  under  the  name  of  the  Persian  official 
the  malignity  of  their  enemies  in  all  ages.  Very  often 
this  name  has  served  to  veil  a  dangerous  reference  to 
some  contemporary  foe,  or  to  heighten  the  rage  felt 
against  an  exceptionally  odious  person  by  its  accumu- 
lation of  traditional  hatred,  just  as  in  England  on  the 
fifth  of  November  the  ''Guy"  may  represent  some 
unpopular  person  of  the  day. 

When  we  turn  from  this  unamiable  indulgence  of 
spiteful  passion  to  the  story  that  lies  behind  it,  we  have 
enough  that  is  odious  without  the  conception  of  a  sheer 
monster  of  wickedness,  a  very  demon.  Such  a  being 
would  stand  outside  the  range  of  human  motives,  and 
we  could  contemplate  him  with  unconcern  and  detach- 
ment of  mind,  just  as  we  contemplate  the  destructive 
forces  of  nature.  There  is  a  common  temptation  to  clear 
ourselves  of  all  semblance  to  the  guilt  of  very  bad 
people  by  making  it  out  to  be  inhuman.  It  is  more 
humiliating  to  discover  that  they  act  from  quite  human 
motives — nay,  that  those  very  motives  may  be  detected, 
though  with  other  bearings,  even  in  our  own  conduct. 
For  see  what  were  the  influences  that  stirred  in  the 
heart  of  Haman.  He  manifests  by  his  behaviour  the 
intimate  connection  between  vanity  and  cruelty. 

The  first  trait  in  his  character  to  reveal  itself  is 
vanity,  a  most  inordinate  vanity.  Haman  is  introduced 
at  the  moment  when  he  has  been  exalted  to  the  highest 
position  under  the  king  of  Persia  ;  he  has  just  been 
made   grand   vizier.      The    tremendous  honour   turns 


Esther  iii.  1-6.]  HAMAN.  373 

his  brain.  In  the  consciousness  of  it  he  swells  out 
with  vanity.  As  a  necessary  consequence  he  is  bit- 
terly chagrined  when  a  porter  does  not  do  homage 
to  him  as  to  the  king.  His  elation  is  equally  extra- 
vagant when  he  discovers  that  he  is  to  be  the  only 
subject  invited  to  meet  Ahasuerus  at  Esther's  banquet. 
When  the  king  inquires  how  exceptional  honour  is  to 
be  shown  to  some  one  whose  name  is  not  yet  revealed, 
this  infatuated  man  jumps  to  the  conclusion  that  it  can 
be  for  nobody  but  himself.  In  all  his  behaviour  we 
see  that  he  is  just  possessed  by  an  absorbing  spirit  of 
vanity. 

Then  at  the  first  check  he  suffers  an  annoyance 
proportionate  to  the  boundlessness  of  his  previous 
elation.  He  cannot  endure  the  sight  of  indifference  or 
independence  in  the  meanest  subject.  The  slender 
fault  of  Mordecai  is  magnified  into  a  capital  offence. 
This  again  is  so  huge  that  it  must  be  laid  to  the  charge 
of  the  whole  race  to  which  the  offender  belongs.  The 
rage  which  it  excites  in  Haman  is  so  violent  that 
it  will  be  satisfied  with  nothing  short  of  a  wholesale 
massacre  of  men,  women,  and  children.  "  Behold  how 
great  a  matter  a  little  fire  kindleth  " — when  it  is  fanned 
by  the  breath  of  vanity.  The  cruelty  of  the  vain  man 
is  as  limitless  as  his  vanity. 

Thus  the  story  of  Haman  illustrates  the  close  juxta- 
position of  these  two  vices,  vanity  and  cruelty ;  it  helps 
us  to  see  by  a  series  of  lurid  pictures  how  fearfully 
provocative  the  one  is  of  the  other.  As  we  follow  the 
incidents,  we  can  discover  the  Hnks  of  connection 
between  the  cause  and  its  dire  effects. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  clear  that  vanity  is  a  form  of 
magnified  egotism.  The  vain  man  thinks  supremely  of 
himself,  not  so  much  in  the  way  of  self-interest,  but 


174  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


more  especially  for  the  sake  of  self-glorification. 
When  he  looks  out  on  the  world,  it  is  always  through  the 
medium  of  his  own  vastly  magnified  shadow.  Like 
the  Brocken  Ghost,  this  shadow  becomes  a  haunting 
presence  standing  out  before  him  in  huge  proportions. 
He  has  no  other  standard  of  measurement.  Everything 
must  be  judged  according  as  it  is  related  to  himself 
The  good  is  what  gives  him  pleasure  ;  evil  is  what  is 
noxious  to  him.  This  self-centred  attitude,  with  the 
distortion  of  vision  that  it  induces,  has  a  double  effect, 
as  we  m.a}^  see  in  the  case  of  Haman. 

Egotism  utilises  the  sufferings  of  others  for  its  own 
ends.  No  doubt  cruelty  is  often  a  consequence  of  sheer 
callousness-.  The  man  who  has  no  perception  of  the 
pain  he  is  causing  or  no  sympathy  with  the  sufferers 
will  trample  them  under  foot  on  the  least  provocation. 
He  feels  supremely  indifferent  to  their  agonies  when 
they  are  writhing  beneath  him,  and  therefore  he  will 
never  consider  it  incumbent  on  him  to  adjust  his 
conduct  with  the  least  reference  to  the  pain  he  gives. 
That  is  an  entirely  irrelevant  consideration.  The  least 
inconvenience  to  himself  outweighs  the  greatest  distress 
of  other  people,  for  the  simple  reason  that  that  distress 
counts  as  nothing  in  his  calculation  of  motives.  In 
Haman's  case,  however,  we  do  not  meet  with  this 
attitude  of  simple  indifference.  The  grand  vizier  is 
irritated,  and  he  vents  his  annoyance  in  a  vast  ex- 
plosion of  malignity  that  must  take  account  of  the 
agony  it  produces,  for  in  that  agony  its  own  thirst 
for  vengeance  is  to  be  slaked.  But  this  only  shows 
the  predominant  selfishness  to  be  all  the  greater.  It 
is  so  great  that  it  reverses  the  engines  that  drive 
society  along  the  line  of  mutual  helpfulness,  and 
thwarts  and  frustrates  any  amount  of  human  life  and 


Esther  iii.  i-6.]  HAM  AN.  375 


happiness  for  the  sole  purpose  of  gratifying  its  own 
desires. 

Then  the  selfishness  of  vanity  promotes  cruelty  still 
further  by  another  of  its  effects.  It  destroys  the  sense 
of  proportion.  Self  is  not  only  regarded  as  the  centre 
of  the  universe ;  like  the  sun  surrounded  by  the 
planets,  it  is  taken  to  be  the  greatest  object,  and 
everything  else  is  insignificant  when  compared  to  it. 
What  is  the  slaughter  of  a  few  thousand  Jews  to  so 
great  a  man  as  Haman,  grand  vizier  of  Persia  ?  It 
is  no  more  than  the  destruction  of  as  many  flies  in 
a  forest  fire  that  the  settler  has  kindled  to  clear  his 
ground.  The  same  self-magnification  is  visibly  pre- 
sented .  by  the  Egyptian  bas-reliefs,  on  which  the 
victorious  Pharaohs  appear  as  tremendous  giants 
driving  back  hordes  of  enemies  or  dragging  pigmy 
kings  by  their  heads.  It  is  but  a  step  from  this  con- 
dition to  insanity,  which  is  the  apotheosis  of  vanity. 
The  chief  characteristic  of  insanity  is  a  diseased  en- 
largement of  self.  If  he  is  elated  the  madman  regards 
himself  as  a  person  of  supreme  importance — as  a 
prince,  as  a  king,  even  as  God.  If  he  is  depressed 
he  thinks  that  he  is  the  victim  of  exceptional  malignity. 
In  that  case  he  is  beset  by  watchers  of  evil  intent ; 
the  world  is  conspiring  against  him  ;  everything  that 
happens  is  part  of  a  plot  to  do  him  harm.  Hence 
his  suspiciousness ;  hence  his  homicidal  proclivities. 
He  is  not  so  mad  in  his  inferences  and  conclusions. 
These  may  be  rational  and  just,  on  the  ground  of  his 
premisses.  It  is  in  the  fixed  ideas  of  these  premisses 
that  the  root  of  his  insanity  may  be  detected.  His 
awful  fate  is  a  warning  to  all  who  venture  to  indulge 
in  the  vice  of  excessive  egotism. 

In  the  second  place,  vanity  leads  to  cruelty  through 


376  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


the  entire  dependence  of  the  vain  person  on  the  good 
opinion  of  others  ;  and  this  we  may  see  dearly  in  the 
career  of  Haman.  Vanity  is  differentiated  from  pride 
in  one  important  particular— by  its  outward  reference. 
The  proud  man  is  satisfied  with  himself;  but  the  vain 
man  is  always  looking  outside  himself  with  feverish 
eagerness  to  secure  all  the  honours  that  the  world  can 
bestow  upon  him.  Thus  Mordecai  may  have  been 
proud  in  his  refusal  to  bow  before  the  upstart  premier : 
if  so  his  pride  would  not  need  to  court  admiration ; 
it  would  be  self-contained  and  self-sufficient.  But 
Haman  was  possessed  by  an  insatiable  thirst  for 
homage.  If  a  single  obscure  individual  refused  him 
this  honour,  a  shadow  rested  on  everything.  He  could 
not  enjoy  the  queen's  banquet  for  the  slight  offered 
him  by  the  Jew  at  the  palace  gate,  so  that  he  ex- 
claimed, "  Yet  all  this  availeth  me  nothing,  so  long  as 
I  see  Mordecai  the  Jew  sitting  at  the  king's  gate."* 
A  selfish  man  in  this  condition  can  have  no  rest  if 
anything  in  the  world  outside  him  fails  to  minister 
to  his  honour.  While  a  proud  man  in  an  exalted 
position  scarcely  deigns  to  notice  the  "dim  common 
people,"  the  vain  man  betrays  his  vulgarity  by  caring 
supremely  for  popular  adulation.  Therefore  while  the 
haughty  person  can  afford  to  pass  over  a  slight  with 
contempt,  the  vain  creature  who  lives  on  the  breath  of 
applause  is  mortally  offended  by  it  and  roused  to  avenge 
the  insult  with  corresponding  rage. 

Selfishness  and  dependence  on  the  external,  these  attri- 
butes of  vanity  inevitably  develop  into  cruelty  wherever 
the  aims  of  vanity  are  opposed.  And  yet  the  vice  that 
contains  so  much  evil  is  rarely  visited  with  a  becoming 

*  Esther  v.  13. 


Esther  iii.  1-6.]  HAM  AN.  yj>j 


severity  of  condemnation.     Usually  it  is  smiled  at  as  a 
trivial  frailty.     In  the  case  of  Haman  it  threatened  the 
extermination   of  a   nation,  and   the  reaction   from  its 
menace  issued  in  a  terrific  slaughter  of  another  section 
of  society.     History  records  war    after  war  that    has 
been  fought  on  the  ground  of  vanity.     In  military  affairs 
this  vice  wears  the  name  of  glory ;  but  its  nature  is 
unaltered.      For   what  is  the  meaning  of  a  war  that 
is  waged  for  "  la  gloire  "  but  one  that  is  designed   in 
order    to  minister   to  the   vanity   of  the   people   v^^ho 
undertake  it  ?     A  more  fearful  wickedness  has  never 
blackened  the  pages  of  history.     The  very  frivolity  of 
the  occasion  heightens  the  guilt  of  those  who  plunge 
nations  into  misery  on  such  a  paltry  pretext.      It    is 
vanity  that  urges  a  savage  warrior  to  collect  skulls  to 
adorn  the  walls  of  his  hut  with  the  ghastly  trophies  ; 
it  is  vanity  that  impels  a  restless  conqueror  to  march  to 
his  own  triumph  through  a  sea  of  blood  ;  it  is  vanity 
that  rouses  a  nation  to  fling  itself  on  its  neighbour  in 
order  to  exalt  its  fame  by  a  great  victory.     Ambition 
at  its  best  is  fired  by  the  pride  of  power;  but  in  its 
meaner  forms  ambition  is  nothing  but  an  uprising  of 
vanity  clamouring  for  wider  recognition.     The  famous 
invasion  of  Greece  by  Xerxes  was  evidently  Httle  better 
than  a  huge  exhibition  of  regal  vanity.     The  childish 
fatuity  of  the  king  could   seek  for  no  exalted    ends. 
His  assemblage  of  swarms  of  men  of  all  races  in  an 
ill-disciplined  army  too  big  for  practical  warfare  showed 
that  the  thirst  for  display  occupied  the  principal  place 
in   his  mind,   to  the  neglect   of   the  more  sober  aims 
of  a  really  great  conqueror.     And  if  the  vanity  that 
lives  on  the  world's  admiration  is  so   fruitful    in   evil 
when    it   is   allowed  to   deploy    on    a    large  scale,  its 
essential    character    will    not    be    improved    by    the 


378  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 


limitation  of  its  scope  in  humbler  spheres  of  life.     It 
is  always  mean  and  cruel. 

Two  other  features  in  the  character  of  Haman  may 
be  noticed.  First,  he  shows  energy  and  determination. 
He  bribes  the  king  to  obtain  the  royal  consent  to  his 
deadly  design,  bribes  with  an  enormous  present  equal 
to  the  revenue  of  a  kingdom,  though  Ahasuerus  per- 
mits him  to  recoup  himself  by  seizing  the  property  of  the 
proscribed  nation.  Then  the  murderous  mandate  goes 
forth  :  it  is  translated  into  every  language  of  the  subject 
peoples ;  it  is  carried  to  the  remotest  parts  of  the  king- 
dom by  the  posts,  the  excellent  organisation  of  which^ 
under  the  Persian  government  has  become  famous. 
Thus  far  everything  is  on  a  large  scale,  betokening  a 
mind  of  resource  and  daring.  But  now  turn  to  the 
sequel.  "And  the  king  and  Haman  sat  down  to 
drink."*  It  is  a  horrible  picture — the  king  of  Persia 
and  his  grand  vizier  at  this  crisis  dehberately  aban- 
doning themselves  to  their  national  vice.  The  decree 
is  out ;  it  cannot  be  recalled — let  it  go  and  do  its  fell 
work.  As  for  its  authors,  they  are  drov/ning  all  thought 
of  its  effect  on  public  opinion  in  the  wine-cup  ;  they 
are  boozing  together  in  a  disgusting  companionship  of 
debauchery  on  the  eve  of  a  scene  of  wholesale  blood- 
shed. This  is  what  the  glory  of  the  Great  King  has 
come  to.  This  is  the  anti-climax  of  his  minister's 
vanity  at  the  moment  of  supreme  success.  After  such 
an  exhibition  we  need  not  be  surprised  at  the  abject 
hum.iliation,  the  terror  of  cowardice,  the  frantic  effort 
to  extort  pity  from  a  woman  of  the  very  race  whose 
extermination  he  had  plotted,  manifested  by  Haman  in 
the  hour  of  his  exposure  at  Esther's  banquet.     Beneath 

^  Esther  iii.  15. 


Esther  iii.  1-6.]  HAMAN.  379 


all  his  braggart  energy  he  is  a  weak  man.  In  most 
cases  self-indulgent,  vain,  and  cruel  people  are  essen- 
tially weak  at  heart. 

Looking  at  the  story  of  Haman  from  another  point 
of  view,  we  see  how  well  it  illustrates  the  confounding 
of  evil  devices  and  the  punishment  of  their  author  in 
the  drama  of  history.  It  is  one  of  the  most  striking 
instances  of  what  is  called  ''  poetic  justice,"  the  justice 
depicted  by  the  poets,  but  not  always  seen  in  prosaic 
lives,  the  justice  that  is  itself  a  poem  because  it  makes  a 
harmony  of  events.  Haman  is  the  typical  example  of 
the  schemer  who  '*  falls  into  his  own  pit,"  of  the  villain 
who  is  "  hoisted  on  his  own  petard."  Three  times  the 
same  process  occurs,  to  impress  its  lesson  with  threefold 
emphasis.  We  have  it  first  in  the  most  moderate  form 
when  Haman  is  forced  to  assist  in  bestowing  on 
Mordecai  the  honours  he  has  been  coveting  for  himself, 
by  leading  the  horse  of  tlie  hated  Jew  in  his  triumphant 
procession  through  the  city.  The  same  lesson  is  im- 
pressed with  tragic  force  Vv^hen  the  grand  vizier  is  con- 
demned to  be  impaled  on  the  stake  erected  by  him  in 
readiness  for  the  man  whom  he  has  been  compelled  to 
honour.  Lastly,  the  design  of  murdering  the  whole 
race  to  which  Mordecai  belongs  is  frustrated  by  the 
slaughter  of  those  who  sympathise  with  Haman's 
attitude  towards  Israel — the  "  Hamanites,"  as  they 
have  been  called.  We  rarely  meet  with  such  a  com- 
plete reversal  of  fate,  such  a  climax  of  vengeance.  In 
considering  the  course  of  events  here  set  forth  we  must 
distinguish  between  the  old  Jewish  view  of  it  and  the 
significance  of  the  process  itself. 

The  Jews  were  taught  to  look  on  all  this  with  fierce, 
vindictive  glee,  and  to  see  in  it  the  prophecy  of  the  like 
fate  that  was  treasured  up  for  their  enemies  in  later 


38o  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


times.  This  rage  of  the  oppressed  against  their 
oppressors,  this  almost  fiendish  delight  in  the  complete 
overthrow  of  the  enemies  of  Israel,  this  total  extinction 
of  any  sentiment  of  pity  even  for  the  helpless  and 
innocent  sufferers  who  are  to  share  the  fate  of  their 
guilty  relatives— in  a  word,  this  utterly  un-Christlike 
spirit  of  revenge,  must  be  odious  in  our  eyes.  We 
cannot  understand  how  good  men  could  stand  by  with 
folded  arms  while  they  saw  women  and  children  tossed 
into  the  seething  cauldron  of  vengeance ;  still  less  how 
they  could  themselves  perpetrate  the  dreadful  deed. 
But  then  we  cannot  understand  that  tragedy  of  history, 
the  oppression  of  the  Jews,  and  its  deteriorating  in- 
fluence on  its  victims,  nor  the  hard,  cruel  spirit  of 
blank  indifference  to  the  sufferings  of  others  that 
prevailed  almost  everywhere  before  Christ  came  to 
teach  the  world  pity. 

When  we  turn  to  the  events  themselves,  we  must 
take  another  view  of  the  situation.  Here  was  a  rough 
and  sweeping,  but  still  a  complete  and  striking  punish- 
ment of  cruel  wrong.  The  Jews  expected  this  too 
frequently  on  earth.  We  have  learnt  that  it  is  more 
often  reserved  for  another  world  and  a  future  state  of 
existence.  Yet  sometimes  we  are  startled  to  see  how 
apl  it  can  be  even  in  this  present  life.  The  cruel  man 
breeds  foes  by  his  very  cruelty;  he  rouses  his  own 
executioners  by  the  rage  that  he  provokes  in  them.  It 
is  the  same  with  respect  to  many  other  forms  of  evil. 
Thus  vanity  is  punished  by  the  humiliation  it  receives 
from  those  people  who  are  irritated  at  its  pretensions ; 
it  is  the  last  failing  that  the  world  will  readily  forgive, 
partly  perhaps  because  it  offends  the  similar  failing 
in  other  people.  Then  we  see  meanness  chastised  by 
the  odium  it  excites,  lying  by  the  distrust  it  provokes. 


Esther  iii.  i-6.]  HAM  AN.  3S1 


cowardice  by  the  attacks  it  invites,  coldness  of  heart 
by  a  corresponding  indifference  on  the  side  of  other 
people.  The  result  is  not  always  so  neatly  effected 
nor  so  visibly  demonstrated  as  in  the  case  of  Haman ; 
but  the  tendency  is  always  present,  because  there  is 
a  Power  that  makes  for  righteousness  presiding  over 
society  and  inherent  in  the  very  constitution  of 
nature. 


T 


CHAPTER   XXXIV. 

QUEEN  ESTHER. 
Esther  iv.  lO— v. ;  vii.  1-4;  ix.  12,  13. 

HE  young  Jewess  who  wins  the  admiration  of  the 
Persian  king  above  all  the  chosen  maidens  of  his 
realm,  and  who  then  delivers  her  people  in  the  crisis 
of  supreme  danger  at  the  risk  of  her  own  life,  is  the 
central  figure  in  the  story  of  the  origin  of  Purim.  It 
was  a  just  perception  of  the  situation  that  led  to  the 
choice  of  her  name  as  the  title  of  the  book  that  records 
her  famous  achievements.  Esther  first  appears  as  an 
obscure  orphan  who  has  been  brought  up  in  the  humble 
home  of  her  cousin  Mordecai.  After  her  guardian  has 
secured  her  admission  to  the  royal  harem — a  doubtful 
honour !  we  might  think,  but  a  very  real  honour  in 
the  eyes  of  an  ancient  Oriental — she  receives  a  year's 
training  with  the  use  of  the  fragrant  unguents  that  are 
esteemed  so  highly  in  a  voluptuous  Eastern  court.  We 
should  not  expect  to  see  anything  better  than  the 
charms  of  physical  beauty  after  such  a  process  of 
development,  charms  not  of  the  highest  type — languid, 
uscious,  sensuous.  The  new  name  bestowed  on  this 
finished  product  of  the  chief  art  cultivated  in  the 
palace  of  Ahasuerus  points  to  nothing  higher,  for 
"  Esther  "  (/star)  is  the  name  of  a  Babylonian  goddess 
equivalent  to  the  Greek    "  Aphrodite."     And  yet  our 


Esther  iv.  lo-v.]  QUEEN  ESTHER. 


Esther  is  a  heroine — capable,  energetic,  brave,  and « 
patriotic.  The  splendour  of  her  career  is  seen  in  this 
very  fact,  that  she  does  not  succumb  to  the  luxury  of 
her  surroundings.  The  royal  harem  among  the  lily-beds 
of  Shushan  is  like  a  palace  in  the  land  of  the  lotus-eaters, 
"  where  it  is  always  afternoon  " ;  and  its  inmates,  in 
their  dreamy  indolence,  arc  tempted  to  forget  all  obliga- 
tions and  interests  beyond  the  obligation  to  please  the 
king  and  their  own  interest  inpecuring  every  comfort 
wealth  can  lavish  on  them.  We  do  not  look  for  a 
Boadicea  in  such  a  hot-house  of  narcotics.  And  when 
we  find  there  a  strong,  unselfish  woman  such  as  Esther, 
conquering  almost  insuperable  temptations  to  a  fife  of 
ease,  and  choosing  a  course  of  terrible  danger  to  herself 
for  the  sake  of  her  oppressed  people,  we  can  echo  the 
admiration  of  the  Jews  for  their  national  heroine. 

It  is  a  woman,  then,  who  plays  the  leading  part  in 
this  drama  of  Jewish  history.  From  Eve  to  Mary,  , 
women  have  repeatedly  appeared  in  the  most  prominent 
places  on  the  pages  of  Scripture.  The  history  of  Israel 
finds  some  of  its  most  powerful  situations  in  the  exploits 
of  Deborah,  Jael,  and  Judith.  On  the  side  of  evil, 
Delilah,  Athaliah,  and  Jezebel  are  not  less  conspicuous. 
There  was  a  freedom  enjoyed  by  the  women  of  Israel 
that  was  not  allowed  in  the  more  elaborate  civilisation 
of  the  great  empires  of  the  East,  and  this  developed  an 
independent  spirit  and  a  vigour  not  usually  seen  in 
Oriental  women.  In  the  case  of  Esther  these  good 
qualities  were  able  to  survive  the  external  restraints 
and  the  internal  relaxing  atmosphere  of  her  court  life. 
The  scene  of  her  story  is  laid  in  the  harem.  The  plots 
and  intrigues  of  the  harem  furnish  its  principal  inci- 
dents. Yet  if  Esther  had  been  a  shepherdess  from  the 
mountains  of  Judah,  she  could  not  have  proved  herself 


384  EZRA,   NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

more  energetic.  But  her  court  life  had  taught  her  skill 
in  diplomacy,  for  she  had  to  pick  her  way  among  the 
greatest  dangers  like  a  person  walking  among  concealed 
knives. 

The  beauty  of  Esther's  character  is  this,  that  she 
is  not  spoiled  by  her  great  elevation.  To  be  the  one 
favourite  out  of  all  the  select  maidens  of  the  kingdom, 
and  to  know  that  she  owes  her  privileged  position  solely 
to  the  king's  fancy  for  her  personal  charms,  might 
have  spoilt  the  grace  of  a  simple  Jewess.  Haman, 
we  saw,  was  ruined  by  his  honours  becoming  too 
great  for  his  self-control.  But  in  Esther  we  do  not 
light  on  a  trace  of  the  silly  vanity  that  became  the 
most  marked  characteristic  of  the  grand  vizier.  It 
speaks  well  for  Mordecai's  sound  training  of  the  orphan 
girl  that  his  ward  proved  to  be  of  stable  character 
where  a  weaker  person  would  have  been  dizzy  with 
selfish  elation. 

The  unchanged  simplicity  of  Esther's  character  is 
first  apparent  in  her  submissive  obedience  to  her 
guardian  even  after  her  high  position  has  been  attained. 
Though  she  is  treated  as  his  Queen  by  the  Great  King, 
she  does  not  forget  the  kind  porter  who  has  brought 
her  up  from  childhood.  In  the  old  days  she  had  been 
accustomed  to  obey  this  grave  Jew,  and  she  has  no 
idea  of  throwing  off  the  yoke  now  that  he  has  no  longer 
any  recognised  power  over  her.  The  habit  of  obedience 
persists  in  her  after  the  necessity  for  it  has  been  re- 
moved. This  would  not  have  been  so  remarkable  if 
Esther  had  been  a  weak-minded  woman,  readily  subdued 
and  kept  in  subjection  by  a  masterful  will.  But  her 
energy  and  courage  at  a  momentous  crisis  entirely  for- 
bid any  such  estimate  of  her  character.  It  must  have 
been  genuine  humility  and  unselfishness  that  prevented 


Esther  iv.  lo— v.]  QUEEN  ESTHER.  385 

her  from  rebelling  against  the  old  home  authority  when 
a  heavy  injunction  was  laid  upon  her.  She  undertakes 
the  dangerous  part  of  the  champion  of  a  threatened 
race  solely  at  the  instance  of  Mordecai.  lie  urges  the 
duty  upon  her,  and  she  accepts  it  meekly.  She  is  no 
rough  Amazon.  With  all  her  greatness  and  power,  she 
is  still  a  simple,  unassuming  woman. 

But  when  Esther  has  assented  to  the  demands  of 
Mordecai,  she  appears  in  her  people's  cause  with  the 
spirit  of  true  patriotism.  She  scorns  to  forget  her 
humble  origin  in  all  the  splendour  of  her  later  advance- 
ment. She  will  own  her  despised  and  hated  people 
before  the  king ;  she  will  plead  the  cause  of  the 
oppressed,  though  at  the  risk  of  her  life.  She  is  aware 
of  the  danger  of  her  undertaking;  but  she  says,  '^  If  I 
perish,  I  perish."  The  habit  of  obedience  could  not 
have  been  strong  enough  to  carry  her  through  the 
terrible  ordeal  if  Mordecai's  hard  requirement  had 
not  been  seconded  by  the  voice  of  her  own  conscience. 
She  knows  that  it  is  right  that  she  should  undertake 
this  difficult  and  dangerous  work.  How  naturally 
might  she  have  shrunk  back  with  regret  for  the  seclusion 
and  obscurity  of  the  old  days  when  her  safety  lay  in 
her  insignificance  ?  But  she  saw  that  her  new  privileges 
involved  new  responsibilities.  A  royal  harem  is  the 
last  place  in  which  we  should  look  for  the  recognition 
of  this  truth.  Esther  is  to  be  honoured  because  even 
in  that  palace  of  idle  luxury  she  could  acknowledge  the 
stern  obligation  that  so  many  in  her  position  would 
never  have  glanced  at.  It  is  always  difficult  to  perceive 
and  act  on  the  responsibility  that  certainly  accompanies 
favour  and  power.  This  difficulty  is  one  reason  why 
"it  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  go  through  the  eye  of  a 
needle,  than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  into  the  kingdom 

25 


386       EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


of  God."  For  while  unusual  prosperity  brings  unusual 
w/  ^t/  responsibility,  simply  because  it  affords  unusual  oppor- 
tunities for  doing  good,  it  tends  to  cultivate  pride  and 
selfishness,  and  the  miserable  worldly  spirit  that  is  fatal 
to  all  high  endeavour  and  all  real  sacrifice.  Our  Lord's 
great  principle,  ''  Unto  whom  much  is  given,  of  him 
shall  much  be  required,"  is  clear  as  a  mathematical 
axiom  when  we  look  at  it  in  the  abstract ;  but  nothing 
is  harder  than  for  people  to  apply  it  to  their  own  cases. 
If  it  were  freely  admitted,  the  ambition  that  grasps  at 
the  first  places  would  be  shamed  into  silence.  If  it 
were  generally  acted  on,  the  wide  social  cleft  between 
the  fortunate  and  the  miserable  would  be  speedily 
bridged  over.  The  total  ignoring  of  this  tremendous 
principle  by  the  great  majority  of  those  who  enjoy  the 
privileged  positions  in  society  is  undoubtedly  one  of 
the  chief  causes  of  the  ominous  unrest  that  is  growing 
more  and  more  disturbing  in  the  less  favoured  ranks  of 
life.  If  this  supercilious  contempt  for  an  imperative 
duty  continues,  what  can  be  the  end  but  an  awful  retri- 
bution ?  Was  it  not  the  wilful  blindness  of  the  dancers 
in  the  Tuileries  to  the  misery  of  the  serfs  on  the  fields 
that  caused  revolutionary  France  to  run  red  with 
blood  ? 

Esther  was  wise  in  taking  the  suggestion  of  her 
cousin  that  she  had  been  raised  up  for  the  very  purpose 
of  saving  her  people.  Here  was  a  faith,  reserved  and 
reticent,  but  real  and  powerful.  It  was  no  idle  chance 
that  had  tossed  her  on  the  crest  of  the  wave  while  so 
many  of  her  sisters  were  weltering  in  the  dark  floods 
beneath.  A  clear,  high  purpose  was  leading  her  on  to 
a  strange  and  mighty  destiny,  and  now  the  destiny  was 
appearing,  sublime  and  terrible,  like  some  awful  moun- 
tain peak  that  must  be  climbed  unless  the  soul  that  has 


Esther  iv.  lo-v.]  QUEEN  ESTHER.  387 


come  thus  far  will  turn  traitor  and  fall  back  into  failure 
and  ignominy.  When  Esther  saw  this,  she  acted  on 
it  with  the  promptitude  of  the  founder  of  her  nation, 
who  esteemed  ''  the  reproach  of  Christ  greater  riches 
than  the  treasures  of  Egypt "  ;  but  with  this  difference, 
that,  while  Moses  renounced  his  high  rank  in  Pharaoh's 
court  in  order  to  identify  himself  with  his  people,  the 
Queen  of  Ahasuerus  retained  her  perilous  position  and 
turned  it  to  good  account  in  her  saving  mission.  Thus 
there  are  two  ways  in  which  an  exalted  person  may 
serve  others.  He  may  come  down  from  his  high  estate 
like  Moses,  like  Christ  who  was  rich  and  for  our  sakes 
became  poor ;  or  he  may  take  advantage  of  his  privileged 
position  to  use  it  for  the  good  of  his  brethren,  regarding 
it  as  a  trust  to  be  held  for  those  whom  he  can  benefit, 
like  Joseph,  who  was  able  in  this  way  to  save  his  father 
and  his  brothers  from  famine,  and  like  Esther  in  the 
present  case.  Circumstances  will  guide  the  willing  to  a 
decision  as  to  which  of  these  courses  should  be  chosen. 
We  must  not  turn  from  this  subject  without  remem-. 
bering  that  Mordecai  plied  Esther  with  other  considera- 
tions besides  the  thought  of  her  mysterious  destiny. 
He  warned  her  that  she  should  not  escape  if  she  dis- 
owned her  people.  He  expressed  his  confidence  that 
if  she  shrank  from  her  high  mission  deliverance  would 
''come  from  another  place,"  to  her  eternal  shame. 
Duty  is  difficult,  and  there  is  often  a  call  for  the  com- 
paratively lower,  because  more  selfish,  considerations 
that  urge  to  it.  The  reluctant  horse  requires  the  spur. 
And  yet  the  noble  courage  of  Esther  could  not  have  come 
chiefly  from  fear  or  any  other  selfish  motive.  It  must 
have  been  a  sense  of  her  high  duty  and  wonderful 
destiny  that  inspired  her.  There  is  no  inspiration  like 
that  of  the  belief  that  we  are  called  to  a  great  mission. 


388  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

This  is  the  secret  of  the  fanatical  heroism  of  the  Madhist 
dervishes.  In  a  more  holy  warfare  it  makes  heroes  of 
the  weakest. 

Having  once  accepted  her  dreadful  task,  Esther  pro- 
ceeded to  carry  it  out  with  courage.  It  was  a  daring 
act  for  her  to  enter  the  presence  of  the  king  unsum- 
moned.  Who  could  tell  but  that  the  fickle  monarch 
might  take  offence  at  the  presumption  of  his  new 
favourite,  as  he  had  done  in  the  case  of  her  prede- 
cessor? Her  lonely  position  might  have  made  the 
strongest  of  women  quail  as  she  stepped  forth  from  her 
seclusion  and  ventured  to  approach  her  lord.  Her 
m.otive  might  be  shamefully  misconstrued  by  the  low- 
minded  monarch.  Would  the  king  hold  out  the  golden 
sceptre  to  her  ?  The  chances  of  Hfe  and  death  hung 
on  the  answer  to  that  question.  Nehemiah,  though  a 
courageous  man  and  a  favourite  of  his  royal  master,  was 
filled  with  apprehension  at  the  prospect  of  a  far  less 
dangerous  interview  with  a  much  more  reasonable 
ruler  than  the  half-mad  Xerxes.  These  Oriental 
autocrats  Vvere  shrouded  in  the  terror  of  divinities. 
Their  absolute  power  left  the  lives  of  all  who  ap- 
proached them  at  the  mercy  of  their  caprice.  Aha- 
suerus  had  just  sanctioned  a  senseless,  bloodthirsty 
decree.  Very  possibly  he  had  murdered  Vashti,  and 
that  on  the  offence  of  a  moment.  Esther  was  in 
favour,  but  she  belonged  to  the  doomed  people,  and 
she  was  committing  an  illegal  action  deliberately  in  the 
face  of  the  king.  She  was  Fatima  risking  the  wrath  of 
Bluebeard.  We  know  how  Nehemiah  would  have  acted 
at  this  trying  moment.  He  would  have  strengthened 
his  heart  with  one  of  those  sudden  ejaculations  of 
prayer  that  w^ere  always  ready  to  spring  to  his  lips 
on  any  em.ergency.     It  is  not  in  accordance  with  the 


Esther  iv.  lo— v.]  QUEEN  ESTHER.  389 


secular  tone  of  the  story  of  Esther's  great  undertaking 
that  any  hint  of  such  an  action  on  her  part  should 
have  been  given.  Therefore  we  cannot  say  that  she 
was  a  woman  of  no  religion,  that  she  was  prayerless, 
that  she  launched  on  this  great  enterprise  entirely 
relying  on  her  own  strength.  We  must  distinguish 
between  reserve  and  coldness  in  regard  to  religion. 
The  fire  burns  while  the  heart  muses,  even  though  the 
lips  are  still.  At  all  events,  if  it  is  the  intention  of  the 
writer  to  teach  that  Esther  was  mysteriously  raised  up 
for  the  purpose  of  saving  her  people,  it  is  a  natural 
inference  to  conclude  that  she  was  supported  in  the 
execution  of  it  by  unseen  and  silent  aid.  Her  name 
does  not  appear  in  the  honour  roll  of  Hebrews  xi. 
We  cannot  assert  that  she  acted  in  the  strength  of 
faith.  And  yet  there  is  more  evidence  of  faith,  even 
though  it  is  not  professed,  in  conduct  that  is  true  and 
loyal,  brave  and  unselfish,  than  we  can  find  in  the 
loudest  profession  of  a  creed  without  the  confirmation 
of  corresponding  conduct.  "  I  will  show  my  faith  by 
my  works,"  says  St.  James,  and  he  may  show  it  without 
once  naming  it. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  further,  that  Esther  was  a  woman  of 
resources.  She  did  not  trust  to  her  courage  alone  to 
secure  her  end.  It  was  not  enough  that  she  owned  her 
people,  and  v/as  willing  to  plead  their  cause.  She  had 
the  definite  purpose  of  saving  them  to  effect.  She  was 
not  content  to  be  a  martyr  to  patriotism ;  a  sensible, 
practical  woman,  she  did  her  utmost  to  be  successful 
in  effecting  the  deliverance  of  the  threatened  Jews. 
With  this  end  in  view,  it  was  necessary  for  her  to 
proceed  warily.  Her  first  step  was  gained  when  she  ' 
had  secured  an  audience  with  the  king.  We  may 
surmise   that   her   beautiful    countenance   was    lit    up 


390  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 


With  a  new,  rare  radiance  when  all  self-seeking  was 
banished  from  her  mind  and  an  intense,  noble  aim  fired 
her  soul ;  and  thus,  it  may  be,  her  very  loftiness  of 
purpose  helped  to  secure  its  success.  Beauty  is  a  gift, 
a  talent,  to  be  used  for  good,  like  any  other  Divine 
endowment ;  the  highest  beauty  is  the  splendour  of 
soul  that  sometimes  irradiates  the  most  commonplace 
countenance,  so  that,  like  Stephen's,  it  shines  as  the 
face  of  an  angel.  Instead  of  degrading  her  beauty  with 
foolish  vanity,  Esther  consecrated  it  to  a  noble  service, 
and  thereby  it  was  glorified.  This  one  talent  was  not 
lodged  with  her  useless. 

The  first  point  was  gained  in  securing  the  favour  of 
Ahasuerus.  But  all  was  not  yet  won.  It  would  have 
been  most  unwise  for  Esther  to  have  burst  out  with 
her  daring  plea  for  the  condemned  people  in  the  moment 
of  the  king's  surprised  welcome.  But  she  was  patient 
and  skilful  in  managing  her  delicate  business.  She 
knew  the  king's  weakness  for  good  living,  and  she 
,  played  upon  it  for  her  great  purpose.  Even  when  she 
had  got  him  to  a  first  banquet,  she  did  not  venture  to 
bring  out  her  request.  Perhaps  her  courage  failed  her 
at  the  last  moment.  Perhaps,  like  a  keen,  observant 
woman,  she  perceived  that  she  had  not  yet  wheedled 
the  king  round  to  the  condition  in  which  it  would  be 
safe  to  approach  the  dangerous  topic.  So  she  post- 
poned her  attempt  to  another  day  and  a  second  banquet. 
Then  she  seized  her  opportunity.  With  great  tact,  she 
began  by  pleading  for  her  own  life.  Her  piteous 
entreaty  amazed  the  dense-minded  monarch.  At  the 
same  time  the  anger  of  his  pride  was  roused.  Who 
would  dare  to  touch  his  favourite  queen  ?  It  was  a 
well-chosen  moment  to  bring  such  a  notion  into  the 
mind  of  a  king  who  was  changeable  as  a  child.     We 


Esther  iv.  lo-v.]  QUEEN  ESTHER.  391 

may  be  sure  that  Esther  had  been  doing  her  very  best 
to  please  him  throughout  the  two  banquets.  Then  she 
had  Haman  on  the  spot.  He,  too,  prime  minister  of 
Persia  as  he  was,  had  to  find  that  for  once  in  his  life 
he  had  been  outwitted  by  a  woman.  Esther  meant  to 
strike  while  the  iron  was  hot.  So  the  arch-enemy  of 
her  people  was  there,  that  the  king  might  carry  out  the 
orders  to  which  she  was  skilfully  leading  him  on  with- 
out the  delay  which  would  give  the  party  of  Haman  an 
opportunity  to  turn  him  the  other  way.  Haman  saw 
it  all  in  a  moment.  He  confessed  that  the  queen  was 
mistress  of  the  situation  by  appealing  to  her  for  mercy, 
in  the  frenzy  of  his  terror  even  so  far  forgetting  his 
place  as  to  fling  himself  on  her  couch.  That  only 
aggravated  the  rage  of  the  jealous  king.  Haman's 
fate  was  sealed  on  the  spot.  Esther  was  completely 
triumphant. 

After  this  it  is  painful  to  see  how  the  woman  who 
had  saved  her  people  at  the  risk  of  her  own  life  pushed 
her  advantage  to  the  extremity  of  a  bloodthirsty  ven- 
geance. It  is  all  very  well  to  say  that,  as  the  laws  of 
the  Medes  and  Persians  could  not  be  altered,  there  was 
no  alternative  but  a  defensive  slaughter.  We  may  try  to 
shelter  Esther  under  the  customs  of  the  times  ;  we  may 
call  to  mind  the  fact  that  she  was  acting  on  the  advice 
of  Mordecai,  whom  she  had  been  taught  to  obey  from 
childhood,  so  that  his  was  by  far  the  greater  weight  of 
responsibility.  Still,  as  we  gaze  on  the  portrait  of  the 
strong,  brave,  unselfish  Jewess,  we  must  confess  that 
beneath  all  the  beauty  and  nobility  of  its  expression 
certain  hard  lines  betray  the  fact  that  Esther  is  not  a 
Madonna,  that  the  heroine  of  the  Jews  does  not  reach 
the  Christian  ideal  of  womanhood. 


CHAPTER   XXXV. 

MORDECAI. 

Esther  ii.  5,  6;  iv.  i,  2;  vi.  lo,  11 ;  ix.  1-4. 

THE  hectic  enthusiast  who  inspires  Daniel  Deronda 
with  his  passionate  ideas  is  evidently  a  reflection 
in  modern  Hterature  of  the  Mordecai  of  Scripture.  It 
must  be  admitted  that  the  reflection  approaches  a 
caricature.  The  dreaminess  and  morbid  excitability  of 
George  Eliot's  consumptive  hero  have  no  counterpart 
in  the  wise,  strong  Mentor  of  Queen  Esther ;  and  the 
English  writer's  agnosticism  has  led  her  to  exclude  all 
the  Divine  elements  of  the  Jewish  faith,  so  that  on  her 
pages  the  sole  object  of  Israelite  devotion  is  the  race 
of  Israel.  But  the  very  extravagance  of  the  portraiture 
keenly  accentuates  what  is,  after  all,  the  most  remark- 
able trait  in  the  original  Mordecai.  We  are  not  in  a 
position  to  deny  that  this  man  had  a  Hving  faith  in 
the  God  of  his  fathers ;  we  are  simply  ignorant  as  to 
what  his  attitude  towards  religion  was,  because  the 
author  of  the  Book  of  Esther  draws  a  veil  over  the 
religious  relations  of  all  his  characters.  Still  the  one 
thing  prominent  and  pronounced  in  Mordecai  is 
patriotism,  devotion  to  Israel,  the  expenditure  of 
thought  and  effort  on  the  protection  of  his  threatened 
people. 

The  first  mention  of  the  name  of  Mordecai  introduces 

392 


Esther  ii.  5, 6.J  MORDECAI.  393 

a  hint  of  his-  national  connections.  We  read,  "  There 
was  a  certain  Jew  in  Shushan  the  palace,  whose  name 
was  Mordecai,  the  son  of  Jair,  the  son  of  Shimei,  the  son 
of  Kish,  a  Benjamite ;  who  had  been  carried  away  from 
Jerusalem  with  the  captives  which  had  been  carried 
away  with  Jeconiah  king  of  Judah,  whom  Nebuchad- 
nezzar the  king  of  Babylon  had  carried  away."  * 
Curious  freaks  of  exegesis  have  been  displayed  in 
dealing  with  this  passage.  It  has  been  thought  that 
the  Kish  mentioned  in  it  is  no  other  than  the  father 
of  Saul,  in  which  case  the  ages  of  the  ancestors  of  Mor- 
decai mast  rival  those  of  the  antediluvians;  and  it  has 
been  suggested  that  Mordecai  is  here  represented  as  one 
of  the  original  captives  from  Jerusalem  in  the  reign  of 
Jeccniah,  so  that  at  the  time  of  Xerxes  he  must  have 
been  a  marvellously  old  man,  tottering  on  the  brink  of 
the  grave.  On  these  grounds  the  genealogical  note  has 
been  treated  as  a  fanciful  fiction  invented  to  magnify  the 
importance  of  Mordecai.  But  there  is  no  necessity  to 
take  up  any  such  position.  It  would  be  strange  to  derive 
Mordecai  from  the  far-off  Benjamite  farmer  Kish,  who 
shines  only  in  the  reflected  glory  of  his  son,  whereas 
we  have  no  mention  of  Saul  himself.  There  is  no 
reason  to  say  that  another  Kish  may  not  have  been 
found  among  the  captives.  Then  it  is  quite  possible 
to  dispose  of  the  second  difficulty  by  connecting  the 
relative  clause  at  the  beginning  of  verse  6 — "  who  had 
been  carried  away  " — with  the  nearest  antecedent  in  the 
previous  sentence — viz.,  ^'  Kish  the  Benjamite."  If  we 
remove  the  semi-colon  from  the  end  of  verse  5,  the 
clauses  will  run  on  quite  smoothly  and  there  will  be 
no  reason  to  go  back  to  the  name  of  Mordecai  for  the 

*  Esther  ii,  5,  6. 


394  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

antecedent  of  the  relative ;  we  can  read  the  words  thus 
— ^^  Kish  the  Benjamite  who  had  been  carried  away," 
etc.  In  this  way  all  difficulty  vanishes.  But  the 
passage  still  retains  a  special  significance.  Mordecai 
was  a  true  Jew,  of  the  once  royal  tribe  of  Benjamin, 
a  descendant  of  one  of  the  captive  contemporaries  of 
Jeconiah,  and  therefore  most  Hkely  a  scion  of  a  princely 
house.  The  preservation  of  his  ancestral  record  gives 
us  a  hint  of  the  sort  of  mental  pabulum  on  which  the 
man  had  been  nurtured.  Living  in  the  palace,  appar- 
ently as  a  porter,  and  possibly  as  a  eunuch  of  the 
harem,  Mordecai  would  have  been  tempted  to  forget 
his  people.  Nevertheless  it  is  plain  that  he  had 
cherished  traditions  of  the  sad  past,  and  trained  his 
soul  to  cling  to  the  story  of  his  fathers'  sufferings  in 
spite  of  all  the  distractions  and  dissipations' of  a  Persian 
court  life.  Though  in  a  humbler  sphere,  he  thus 
resembled  Artaxerxes'  cup-bearer,  the  great  patriot 
Nehemiah. 

The  pecuharity  of  Mordecai's  part  in  the  story  is  this, 
that  he  is  the  moving  spirit  of  all  that  is  done  for  the 
deliverance  of  Israel  at  a  time  of  desperate  peril 
without  being  at  first  a  prominent  character.  Thus 
he  first  appears  as  the  guardian  of  his  young  cousin, 
whom  he  has  cherished  and  trained,  and  whom  he  now 
introduces  to  the  royal  harem  where  she  will  play  her 
more  conspicuous  part.  Throughout  the  whole  course 
of  events  Mordecai's  voice  is  repeatedly  heard,  but 
usually  as  that  of  Esther's  prompter.  He  haunts  the 
precincts  of  the  harem,  if  by  chance  he  may  catch 
a  glimpse  of  his  foster  child.  He  is  a  lonely  man  now, 
for  he  has  parted  with  the  light  of  his  home.  He  has 
done  this  voluntarily,  unselfishly — first,  to  advance  the 
lovely  creature  who  has  been  committed  to  his  charge. 


Esther  ii.  5,  6.]  MORDECAI.  395 


and  secondly,  as  it  turns  out,  for  the  saving  of  his  people. 
Even  now  his  chief  thought  is  not  for  the  cheering  of 
his  own  soHtude.  His  constant  aim  is  to  guide  his 
young  cousin  in  the  difficult  path  of  her  new  career. 
Subsequently  he  receives  the  highest  honours  the  king 
can  bestow ;  but  he  never  seeks  them,  and  he  would  be 
quite  content  to  remain  in  the  background  to  the  end, 
if  only  his  eager  desire  for  the  good  of  his  people 
could  be  accomplished  by  the  queen  who  has  learnt  to 
lean  upon  his  counsel  from  her  childhood.  Such  self- 
effacement  is  most  rare  and  beautiful.  A  subtle  tempta- 
tion to  self-regarding  ambition  besets  the  path  of  every 
man  who  attempts  some  great  public  work  for  the  good 
of  others  in  a  way  that  necessarily  brings  him  under 
observation.  Even  though  he  believes  himself  to  be 
inspired  by  the  purest  patriotism,  it  is  impossible  for 
him  not  to  perceive  that  he  is  exposing  himself  to 
admiration  by  the  very  disinterestedness  of  his  conduct. 
The  rare  thing  is  to  see  the  same  earnestness  on  the 
part  of  a  person  in  an  obscure  place,  willing  that  the 
whole  of  his  energy  should  be  devoted  to  the  training 
and  guiding  of  another,  who  alone  is  to  become  the 
visible  agent  of  some  great  work. 

The  one  action  in  which  Mordecai  momentarily  takes 
the  first  place  throws  light  on  another  side  of  his 
character.  There  is  a  secondary  plot  in  the  stor}'. 
Mordecai  saves  the  king's  life  by  discovering  to  him 
a  conspiracy.  The  value  of  this  service  is  strikingly 
illustrated  by  the  historical  fact  that,  at  a  later  time,  just 
another  such  conspiracy  issued  in  the  assassination  of 
Xerxes.  In  the  distractions  of  his  foreign  expeditions 
and  his  abandonment  to  self-indulgence  at  home,  the 
king  forgets  the  whole  affair,  and  Mordecai  goes  on 
his  quiet  way  as  before,  never  dreaming  of  the  honour 


396  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER. 

with  which  it  is  to  be  rewarded.  Now  this  incident 
seems  to  be  introduced  to  show  how  the  intricate 
wheels  of  Providence  all  work  on  for  the  ultimate 
deliverance  of  Israel.  The  accidental  discovery  of 
Mordecai's  unrequited  service  when  the  king  is  beguihng 
the  long  hours  of  a  sleepless  night  by  listening  to  the 
chronicles  of  his  reign  leads  to  the  recognition  of 
Mordecai  and  the  first  humiliation  of  Haman,  and 
prepares  the  king  for  further  measures.  But  the 
incident  reflects  a  side  light  on  Mordecai  in  another 
direction.  The  hum.lle  porter  is  loyal  to  the  great 
despot.  He  is  a  passionately  patriotic  Jew ;  but  his 
patriotism  does  not  make  a  rebel  of  him,  nor  does  it 
permit  him  to  stand  aside  silently  and  see  a  villainous 
intrigue  go  on  unmolested,  even  though  it  is  aimed  at 
the  monarch  who  is  holding  his  people  in  subjection. 
Mordecai  is  the  humble  friend  of  the  great  Persian 
king  in  the  moment  of  danger.  This  is  the  more 
remarkable  when  we  compare  it  with  his  ruthless 
thirst  for  vengeance  against  the  known  enemies  of 
Israel.  It  shows  that  he  does  not  treat  Ahasuerus  as 
an  enemy  of  his  people.  No  doubt  the  writer  of  this 
narrative  wished  it  to  be  seen  that  the  most  patriotic 
Jew  could  be  perfectly  loyal  to  a  foreign  government. 
The  shining  examples  of  Joseph  and  Daniel  have  set 
the  same  idea  before  the  world  for  the  vindication  of  a 
grossly  maligned  people,  who,  like  the  Christians  in  the 
days  of  Tacitus,  have  been  most  unjustly  hated  as  the 
enemies  of  the  human  race.  The  capacity  to  adapt 
itself  loyally  to  the  service  of  foreign  governments, 
without  abandoning  one  iota  of  its  religion  or  its 
patriotism,  is  a  unique  trait  in  the  genius  of  this 
w^onderful  race.  The  Zealot  is  not  the  typical  Jew- 
patriot.     He  is  a  secretion  of  diseased  and   decayed 


Esther  ii.  5,  6.]  MORDECAI.  397 

patriotism.  True  patriotism  is  large  enough  and  patient 
enough  to  recognise  the  duties  that  lie  outside  its  im- 
mediate aims.  Its  fine  perfection  is  attained  when  it 
can  be  flexible  without  becoming  servile. 

We  see  that  in  Mordecai  the  flexibility  of  Jewish 
patriotism  was  consistent  with  a  proud  scorn  of  the 
least  approach  to  servility.  He  would  not  kiss  the 
dust  at  the  approach  of  Haman,  grand  vizier  though 
the  man  was.  It  may  be  that  he  regarded  this  act  of 
homage  as  idolatrous — for  it  would  seem  that  Persian 
monarchs  were  not  unwiUing  to  accept  the  adulation  of 
Divine  honours ;  and  the  vain  minister  was  aping  the 
airs  of  his  royal  master.  But,  perhaps,  like  those 
Greeks  who  would  not  humble  their  pride  by  pros- 
trating themselves  at  the  bidding  of  an  Oriental 
barbarian,  Mordecai  held  himself  up  from  a  sense  of 
self-respect.  In  either  case  it  must  be  evident  that 
he  showed  a  daringly  independent  spirit.  He  could  not 
but  know  that  such  an  affront  as  he  ventured  to  offer 
to  Haman  would  annoy  the  great  man.  But  he  had 
not  calculated  on  the  unfathomable  depths  of  Haman's 
vanity.  Nobody  who  credits  his  fellows  with  rational 
motives  would  dream  that  so  simple  an  offence  as  this 
of  Mordecai's  could  provoke  so  vast  an  act  of  ven- 
geance as  the  massacre  of  a  nation.  When  he  saw  the 
outrageous  consequences  of  his  mild  act  of  independ- 
ence, Mordecai  must  have  felt  it  doubly  incumbent 
upon  him  to  strain  every  nerve  to  save  his  people. 
Their  danger  was  indirectly  due  to  his  conduct.  Still 
he  could  never  have  foreseen  such  a  result,  and  there- 
fore he  should  not  be  held  responsible  for  it.  The 
tremendous  disproportion  between  motive  and  action  in 
the  behaviour  of  Haman  is  like  one  of  those  fantastic 
freaks  that  abound   in  the  impossible  world  of  "  The 


398  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

Arabian  Nights,"  but  for  the  occurrence  of  which  we 
make  no  provision  in  real  Hfe,  simply  because  we  do 
not  act  on  the  assumption  that  the  universe  is  nothing 
better  than  a  huge  lunatic  asylum. 

The  escape  from  this  altogether  unexpected  danger 
is  due  to  two  courses  of  events.  One  of  them — in  ac- 
cordance with  the  reserved  style  of  the  narrative — 
appears  to  be  quite  accidental.  Mordecai  got  the 
reward  he  never  sought  in  w^hat  seems  to  be  the  most 
casual  way.  He  had  no  hand  in  obtaining  for  himself 
an  honour  which  looks  to  us  quaintly  childish.  For  a 
few  brief  hours  he  was  paraded  through  the  streets  of 
the  royal  city  as  the  man  whom  the  king  delighted  to 
honour,  with  no  less  a  person  than  the  grand  vizier 
to  serve  as  his  groom.  It  was  Haman's  silly  vanity 
that  had  invented  this  frivolous  proceeding.  We  can 
hardly  suppose  that  Mordecai  cared  much  for  it.  After 
the  procession  had  completed  its  round,  in  true  Oriental 
fashion  Mordecai  put  off  his  gorgeous  robes,  like  a  poor 
actor  returning  from  the  stage  to  his  garret,  and  settled 
down  to  his  lowly  office  exactly  as  if  nothing  had 
happened.  This  must  seem  to  us  a  foolish  business, 
unless  we  can  look  at  it  through  the  magnifying  glass 
of  an  Oriental  imagination,  and  even  then  there  is 
nothing  very  fascinating  in  it.  Still  it  had  important 
consequences.  For,  in  the  first  place,  it  prepared  the 
way  for  a  further  recognition  of  Mordecai  in  the  future. 
He  was  now  a  marked  personage.  Ahasuerus  knew 
him,  and  was  gratefully  disposed  towards  him.  The 
people  understood  that  the  king  delighted  to  honour 
him.  His  couch  would  not  be  the  softer  nor  his  bread 
the  sweeter  ;  but  all  sorts  of  future  possibilities  lay 
open  before  him.  To  many  men  the  possibilities  of 
life  are  more  precious  than  the  actualities.     We  cannot 


Esther  ii.  5,  6.]  MORDECAI.  399 

say,  however,  that  they  meant  much  to  Mordecai,  for 
he  was  not  ambitious,  and  he  had  no  reason  to  think 
that  the  king's  conscience  was  not  perfectly  satisfied 
with  the  cheap  settlement  of  his  debt  of  gratitude. 
Still  the  possibilities  existed,  and  before  the  end  of 
the  tale  they  had"  blossomed  out  to  very  brilliant 
results. 

But  another  consequence  of  the  pageant  was  that  the 
heart  of  Haman  was  turned  to  gall.  We  see  him  livid 
with  jealousy,  inconsolable  until  his  wife — who  evi- 
dently knows  him  well — proposes  to  satisfy  his  spite  by 
another  piece  of  fanciful  extravagance.  Mordecai  shall 
be  impaled  on  a  mighty  stake,  so  high  that  all  the 
world  shall  see  the  ghastly  spectacle.  This  may  give 
some  comfort  to  the  wounded  vanity  of  the  grand 
vizier.  But  consolation  to  Haman  will  be  death  and 
torment  to  Mordecai. 

Now  we  come  to  the  second  course  of  events  that 
issued  in  the  deliverance  and  triumph  of  Israel,  and 
therewith  in  the  escape  and  exaltation  of  Mordecai. 
Here  the  watchful  porter  is  at  the  spring  of  all  that 
happens.  His  fasting,  and  the  earnest  counsels  he 
lays  upon  Esther,  bear  witness  to  the  intensity  of  his 
nature.  Again  the  characteristic  reserve  of  the  narra- 
tive obscures  all  rehgious  considerations.  But,  as  we 
have  seen  already,  Mordecai  is  persuaded  that  deliver- 
ance will  come  to  Israel  from  some  quarter,  and  he 
suggests  that  Esther  has  been  raised  to  her  high 
position  for  the  purpose  of  saving  her  people.  We 
cannot  but  feel  that  these  hints  veil  a  very  solid  faith 
in  the  providence  of  God  with  regard  to  the  Jews.  On 
the  surface  of  them  they  show  faith  in  the  destiny 
of  Israel,  Mordecai  not  only  loves  his  nation;  he 
believes   in  it.     He  is  sure  it   has   a   future.     It  has 


400  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER, 


survived  the  most  awful  disasters  in  the  past.  It 
seems  to  possess  a  charmed  life.  It  must  emerge 
safely  from  the  present  crisis.  But  Mordecai  is  not 
a  fatalist  whose  creed  paralyses  his  energies.  He  is 
most  distressed  and  anxious  at  the  prospect  of  the 
great  danger  that  threatens  his  people.  He  is  most 
persistent  in  pressing  for  the  execution  of  measures  of 
deliverance.  Still  in  all  this  he  is  buoyed  up  by  a 
strange  faith  in  his  nation's  destiny.  This  is  the 
faith  that  the  Enghsh  novelist  has  transferred  to  her 
modern  Mordecai.  It  cannot  be  gainsayed  that  there 
is  much  in  the  marvellous  history  of  the  unique 
people,  whose  vitality  and  energy  astonish  us  even 
to-day,  to  justify  the  sanguine  expectation  of  prophetic 
souls  that  Israel  has  yet  a  great  destiny  to  fulfil  in 
future  ages. 

The  ugly  side  of  Jewish  patriotism  is  also  apparent 
in  Mordecai,  and  it  must  not  be  ignored.  The  indis- 
criminate massacre  of  the  ''  enemies  "  of  the  Jews  is  a 
savage  act  of  retaliation  that  far  exceeds  the  necessity 
of  self-defence,  and  Mordecai  must  bear  the  chief  blame 
of  this  crime.  But  then  the  considerations  in  extenua- 
tion of  its  guilt  which  have  already  come  under  our 
notice  may  be  applied  to  him.^'^  The  danger  was  supreme. 
The  Jews  were  in  a  minority.  The  king  was  cruel, 
fickle,  senseless.  It  v/as  a  desperate  case.  We  cannot 
be  surprised  that  the  remedy  was  desperate  also.  There 
was  no  moderation  on  either  side,  but  then  ^'  sweet 
reasonableness  "  is  the  last  thing  to  be  looked  for  in 
any  of  the  characters  of  the  Book  of  Esther.  Here 
everything  is  extravagant.  The  course  of  events  is  too 
grotesque  to  be  gravely  v/eighed  in  the  scales  that  are 

*  Page  358.'     N-   ■ 


Esther  ii.  5,  6.]  MORDECAI.  401 

used  in  the  judgment  of  average  men  under  average 
circumstances. 

The  Book  of  Esther  closes  with  an  account  of  the 
estabhshment  of  the  Feast  of  Purim  and  the  exaltation 
of  Mordecai  to  the  vacant  place  of  Haman.  The  Israelite 
porter  becomes  grand  vizier  of  Persia !  This  is  the 
crowning  proof  of  the  triumph  of  the  Jews  consequent 
on  their  deliverance.  The  whole  process  of  events 
that  issues  so  gloriously  is  commemorated  in  the  annual 
Feast  of  Purim.  It  is  true  that  doubts  have  been  throv/n 
on  the  historical  connection  between  that  festival  and 
the  story  of  Esther.  It  has  been  said  that  the  word 
"  Purim  "  may  represent  the  portions  assigned  by  lot, 
but  not  the  lottery  itself ;  that  so  trivial  an  accident  as 
the  method  followed  by  Haman  in  selecting  a  day  for 
his  massacre  of  the  Jews  could  not  give  its  name  to  the 
celebration  of  their  escape  from  the  threatened  danger; 
that  the  feast  was  probably  more  ancient,  and  was  really 
the  festival  of  the  new  moon  for  the  month  in  which  it 
occurs.  With  regard  to  all  of  these  and  any  other  objec- 
tions, there  is  one  remark  that  may  be  made  here.  They 
are  solely  of  archaeological  interest.  The  character 
and  meaning  of  the  feast  as  it  is  known  to  have  been 
celebrated  in  historical  times  is  not  touched  by  them, 
because  it  is  beyond  doubt  that  throughout  the  ages 
Purim  has  been  inspired  with  passionate  and  almost 
dramatic  reminiscences  of  the  story  of  Esther.  Thus 
for  all  the  celebrations  of  the  feast  that  come  within 
our  ken  this  is  its  sole  significance. 

The  worthiness  of  the  festival  will  vary  according  to 
the  ideas  and  feelings  that  are  encouraged  in  connec- 
tion with  it.  When  it  has  been  used  as  an  oppor- 
tunity for  cultivating  ^-id^'of  we,  tiatred,  contempt, 
and  gleeful  vengea»^^?r 'humiliated  .joes,  its  effect 

r  ^  26 


(^ 


402  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER. 

must  have  been  injurious  and  degrading.  When,  how- 
ever, it  has  been  celebrated  in  the  midst  of  grievous 
oppressions,  though  it  has  embittered  the  spirit  of 
animosity  towards  the  oppressor — the  Christian  Haman 
in  most  cases — it  has  been  of  real  service  in  cheering 
a  cruelly  afflicted  people.  Even  when  it  has  been 
carried  through  v^^ith  no  seriousness  of  intention, 
merely  as  a  holiday  devoted  to  music  and  dancing 
and  games  and  all  sorts  of  merry-making,  its  social 
effect  in  bringing  a  gleam  of  light  into  lives  that  were 
as  a  rule  dismally  sordid  may  have  been  decidedly 
healthy. 

But  deeper  thoughts  must  be  stirred  in  devout  hearts 
when  brooding  over  the  profound  significance  of  the 
national  festival.  It  celebrates  a  famous  deliverance  of 
the  Jews  from  a  fearful  danger.  Now  deliverance  is  the 
keynote  of  Jewish  history.  This  note  was  sounded  as 
with  a  trumpet  blast  at  the  very  birth  of  the  nation, 
when,  emerging  from  Egypt  no  better  than  a  body  of 
fugitive  slaves,  Israel  was  led  through  the  Red  Sea  and 
Pharaoh's  hosts  with  their  horses  and  chariots  were 
overwhelmed  in  the  flood.  The  echo  of  the  triumph- 
ant burst  of  praise  that  swelled  out  from  the  exodus 
pealed  down  the  ages  in  the  noblest  songs  of  Hebrew 
Psalmists.  Successive  deliverances  added  volume'* to 
this  richest  note  of  Jewish  poetry.  In  all  who  looked 
up  to  God  as  the  Redeemer  of  Israel  the  music  was 
inspired  by  profound  thankfulness,  by  true  religious 
adoration.  And  yet  Purim  never  became  the  Eucharist 
of  Israel.  It  never  approached  the  solemn  grandeur  of 
Passover,  that  prince  of  festivals,  in  which  the  great 
primitive  deliverance  of  Israel  was  celebrated  with  all 
the  pomp  and  awe  of  its  Divine  associations.  It  was 
always  in  the  main  a  secular  festival,  relegated  to  the 


Esther  ii.  $,  6.]  MORDECAI.  403 


lower  plane  of  social  and  domestic  entertainments,  like 
an  English  bank-holiday.  Still  even  on  its  own  lines  it 
could  serve  a  serious  purpose.  When  Israel  is  practi- 
cally idolised  by  Israelites,  when  the  glory  of  the  nation 
is  accepted  as  the  highest  ideal  to  work  up  to,  the  true 
religion  of  Israel  is  missed,  because  that  is  nothing  less 
than  the  worship  of  God  as  He  is  revealed  in  Hebrew 
history.  Nevertheless,  in  their  right  place,  the  privi- 
leges of  the  nation  and  its  destinies  may  be  made 
the  grounds  of  very  exalted  aspirations.  The  nation 
is  larger  than  the  individual,  larger  than  the  family. 
An  enthusiastic  national  spirit  must  exert  an  expansive 
influence  on  the  narrow,  cramped  lives  of  the  men  and 
women  whom  it  delivers  from  selfish,  domestic,  and 
parochial  limitations.  It  was  a  liberal  education  for 
Jews  to  be  taught  to  love  their  race,  its  history  and  its 
future.  If — as  seems  probable — our  Lord  honoured 
the  Feast  of  Purim  by  taking  part  in  it,*  He  must 
have  credited  the  national  Hfe  of  His  people  with  a 
worthy  mission.  Himself  the  purest  and  best  fruit 
of  the  stock  of  Israel,  on  the  human  side  of  His 
being,  He  realised  in  His  own  great  mission  of  redemp- 
tion the  end  for  which  God  had  repeatedly  redeemed 
Israel.  Thus  He  showed  that  God  had  saved  His 
people,  not  simply  for  their  own  selfish  satisfaction, 
but  that  through  Christ  they  might  carry  salvation  to 
the  world. 

Purged  from  its  base  associations  of  blood  and 
cruelty,  Purim  may  symbolise  to  us  the  triumph  of 
the  Church  of  Christ  over  her  fiercest  foes.  The  spirit 
of  this  triumph  must  be  the  very  opposite  of  the 
spirit  of  wild  vengeance  exhibited  by  Mordecai  and  his 

*  John  V.  I. 


404  EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,   AND  ESTHER, 

people  in  their  brief  season  of  unwonted  elation.  The 
Israel  of  God  can  never  conquer  her  enemies  by  force. 
The  victory  of  the  Church  must  be  the  victory  of 
brotherly  love,  because  brotherly  love  is  the  note  of 
the  true  Church.  But  this  victory  Christ  is  winning 
throughout  the  ages,  and  the  historical  realisation  of 
it  is  to  us  the  Christian  counterpart  of  the  story  of 
Esther.  -^^ 


Date  Due 


if-yr'^1 


"W 


i^;LiU^^' 


M 


HMdEA. 


-pr,„»5*^m ' 


